From owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 19 00:40:45 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D25A16A4CE for ; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 00:40:45 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.gmx.net (pop.gmx.de [213.165.64.20]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7180143D2F for ; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 00:40:44 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from Emanuel.Strobl@gmx.net) Received: (qmail 30593 invoked by uid 65534); 19 Sep 2004 00:40:43 -0000 Received: from flb.schmalzbauer.de (EHLO cale.flintsbach.schmalzbauer.de) (62.245.232.135) by mail.gmx.net (mp007) with SMTP; 19 Sep 2004 02:40:43 +0200 X-Authenticated: #301138 From: Emanuel Strobl To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 02:40:36 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.7 References: <00d001c49dd4$7382dc40$6401a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> In-Reply-To: <00d001c49dd4$7382dc40$6401a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> X-OS: FreeBSD X-Birthday: 10/06/72 X-Address: Munich, 80686 X-Tel: +49 89 18947781 X-CelPhone: +49 173 9967781 X-Country: Germany MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200409190240.41508.Emanuel.Strobl@gmx.net> cc: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org cc: timh@tjhawkins.com Subject: Re: Please explain. X-BeenThere: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD SMP implementation group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 00:40:45 -0000 Am Sonntag, 19. September 2004 01:08 schrieb timh@tjhawkins.com: > 2 Major Issues: > > - FreeBSD has a processor affinity design issue > > - The core kernel issues with FreeBSD is the horrible threading > support.There is so much crap in FreeBSD kernel. The multithreading issue > in freebsd has been delayed for nearly 6 years. They have just made work > arounds, not fixing the actual problem. It seems that the only real BSD > that has made big progress on the core issues is DragonflyBSD. > > It appears that FreeBSD have a clear Multi-threading lock-in issue that > needs to be fixed. Not work arounds. According to many freebsd developers > nobody simply wants to fix this, is it true that the current smp work are > just 'work-arounds' not real fixing? > > The only thing holding FreeBSD back is the Multithreading issue. > > Please clarify this. Why should one answer to this email? Use what ever you think qualifies your needs! > > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" From owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 19 01:09:12 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8B3316A4CE; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 01:09:12 +0000 (GMT) Received: from invasion.mail.pas.earthlink.net (invasion.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.254]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B318D43D45; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 01:09:12 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from steveb99@earthlink.net) Received: from w072.z064003114.lax-ca.dsl.cnc.net ([64.3.114.72] helo=venice) by invasion.mail.pas.earthlink.net with asmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1C8qCW-0007zu-7D; Sat, 18 Sep 2004 18:09:12 -0700 From: "steveb99" To: Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2004 18:09:12 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook, Build 11.0.5510 In-Reply-To: <200409190240.41508.Emanuel.Strobl@gmx.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1441 Thread-Index: AcSd4W57wNcqTUxxQO6+ayVJMWaJXgAAif2A X-ELNK-Trace: 61319303532569511aa676d7e74259b7b3291a7d08dfec7947053bb0cf5c1ac745376250e3be494d350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 64.3.114.72 Message-Id: <20040919010912.B318D43D45@mx1.FreeBSD.org> cc: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org cc: timh@tjhawkins.com Subject: RE: Please explain. X-BeenThere: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD SMP implementation group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 01:09:13 -0000 > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > [mailto:owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of > Emanuel Strobl > Sent: Saturday, September 18, 2004 5:41 PM > To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Cc: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org; freebsd-smp@freebsd.org; > timh@tjhawkins.com > Subject: Re: Please explain. > > Am Sonntag, 19. September 2004 01:08 schrieb timh@tjhawkins.com: > > 2 Major Issues: > > Why should one answer to this email? Use what ever you think > qualifies your needs! > Just a troll, look at all the cross-posting. Steve Barnette From owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 19 01:58:02 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79A8F16A4D0 for ; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 01:58:02 +0000 (GMT) Received: from web53908.mail.yahoo.com (web53908.mail.yahoo.com [206.190.36.218]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DE65D43D4C for ; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 01:58:01 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from stheg_olloydson@yahoo.com) Message-ID: <20040919015801.37222.qmail@web53908.mail.yahoo.com> Received: from [67.34.130.149] by web53908.mail.yahoo.com via HTTP; Sat, 18 Sep 2004 18:58:01 PDT Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2004 18:58:01 -0700 (PDT) From: stheg olloydson To: timh@tjhawkins.com In-Reply-To: <00da01c49dde$3074fb90$6401a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii cc: questions@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Please explain. X-BeenThere: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD SMP implementation group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 01:58:02 -0000 Plesae, excuse the messiness of the reply to a poster using MS's broken formatting. --- timh@tjhawkins.com wrote: > processor affinity design issue.. i.e.. processes stay on the cpu > they are > spawned on..which is a big problem for mysql which explains why it > performs > better on other systems. > > Furthermore, the SMP issue is a common problem among many FreeBSD > developers > whom have told me the same, there is alot of this information all > over the > internet. FreeBSD is unable to perform good on multiple CPUs, the > fixes are > just work arounds. > > Unless if the freebsd community has just started to fix the > multithreading > issue, it's a huge problem. Darwin does not have this problem > whatsoever. > > Why do I care? This is a silly question. I have 2 windows PCs here, I > have 9 > other workstations that all run unix. I am a server manager and I do > consulting work for freebsd/linux. Windows came free so why not? I > don't do > business on it. > > I've been a really huge FreeBSD supporter.. but I am really concerned > about > this issue which has been an issue for so long. > > thanks, > tim h. > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "stheg olloydson" > To: > Cc: > Sent: Saturday, September 18, 2004 7:05 PM > Subject: Re: Please explain. > > >> >>>From: >>> >>>X-MSMail-Priority: Normal >>>X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2720.3000 >>>X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 >>>X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - ns0.secureanonymous.com >>>X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - freebsd.org >>>X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [47 12] >>>X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - tjhawkins.com >>>Subject: Please explain. >>> >>> >>>2 Major Issues: >>> >>>- FreeBSD has a processor affinity design issue >>> >>>- The core kernel issues with FreeBSD is the horrible threading >>>support.There is so much crap in FreeBSD kernel. The > multithreading >>>issue in >>>freebsd has been delayed for nearly 6 years. They have just made > work >>>arounds, not fixing the actual problem. It seems that the only > real BSD that >>>has made big progress on the core issues is DragonflyBSD. >>> >>>It appears that FreeBSD have a clear Multi-threading lock-in issue >> that >>>needs to be fixed. Not work arounds. According to many freebsd >>>developers >>>nobody simply wants to fix this, is it true that the current smp > work >>>are >>>just 'work-arounds' not real fixing? >>> >>>The only thing holding FreeBSD back is the Multithreading issue. >>> >>>Please clarify this. >> >> Hello, >> >> Please clarify your post. You make many claims without any offering >> any examples. >> You claim, "FreeBSD has a processor affinity design issue". What >> exactly is the issue? Give an example, please. >> You claim, "There is so much crap in FreeBSD kernel. The >>multithreading issue in freebsd has been delayed for nearly 6 years. >> They have just made work arounds, not fixing the actual problem." To >> what "crap in the FreeBSD kernel" are you referring? Please post an >> example of the "horrible threading support" and how it should be >>done. How did you arrive at the time span of "6 years"? Who is this >>"They" that has "just made 'work-arounds' not real fixing?" Who are >>these "many >>freebsd developers" to whom you refer? Finally, you >>claim, "The only >> thing holding FreeBSD back is the Multithreading >>issue." Holding it >> back from what? >> Please explain the basis for your assertions so that the community >> may better answer them. >> >> Regards, >> >> Stheg >> >> BTW: Considering you're running a Windows-based OS, not a BSD-based >> one, why do you even care? Hello, Because you failed to offer any proof of your assertions other than repeating them, albeit with the addition of the vague statement that "there is alot [sic] of this information all over the internet [sic]" (which, if were true, begs the questions why are you asking here then), I cannot put any stock in your claims. My apologies to the community for rising to the troll. Yours truly, Stheg __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail From owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 19 02:14:54 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0EEB316A4CE; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 02:14:54 +0000 (GMT) Received: from ns0.secureanonymous.com (tjhawkins.com [64.232.254.34]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9E2F43D2D; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 02:14:53 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from timh@tjhawkins.com) Received: from cdm-66-76-83-77.fayt.cox-internet.com ([66.76.83.77] helo=yourw92p4bhlzg) by ns0.secureanonymous.com with smtp (Exim 4.34) id 1C8qIt-0005N6-LH; Sat, 18 Sep 2004 20:15:47 -0500 Message-ID: <010801c49dee$72cc5eb0$6401a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> From: To: , , Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2004 21:14:49 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2720.3000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - ns0.secureanonymous.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - freebsd.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - tjhawkins.com X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: Subject: Re: Please explain. X-BeenThere: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD SMP implementation group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 02:14:54 -0000 Ask the FreeBSD developers, any of them with honesty should tell you or proof me false. I dare you to proof this false, I would be so happy if you did. Just because I'm using MS Mailer does not reflect whom I am. I have only 1 MS workstation with 9 others unix. I expected a mature response from most of you, calling names is NOT the way to resolve problems. I just want an answer to see if this is true. **Is it true**? This is what I've noticed myself and many high-scale developers. Thank you ----- Original Message ----- From: "steveb99" To: Cc: ; ; Sent: Saturday, September 18, 2004 8:09 PM Subject: RE: Please explain. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > > [mailto:owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of > > Emanuel Strobl > > Sent: Saturday, September 18, 2004 5:41 PM > > To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > > Cc: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org; freebsd-smp@freebsd.org; > > timh@tjhawkins.com > > Subject: Re: Please explain. > > > > Am Sonntag, 19. September 2004 01:08 schrieb timh@tjhawkins.com: > > > 2 Major Issues: > > > > Why should one answer to this email? Use what ever you think > > qualifies your needs! > > > > Just a troll, look at all the cross-posting. > > Steve Barnette > > > From owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 19 02:22:35 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 482D916A4CE; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 02:22:35 +0000 (GMT) Received: from tomts10-srv.bellnexxia.net (tomts10.bellnexxia.net [209.226.175.54]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F206543D31; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 02:22:33 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dashevil@sympatico.ca) Received: from [192.168.2.32] ([67.68.38.73]) by tomts10-srv.bellnexxia.net ESMTP <20040919022233.TAPJ29920.tomts10-srv.bellnexxia.net@[192.168.2.32]>; Sat, 18 Sep 2004 22:22:33 -0400 From: Chris Laverdure To: timh@tjhawkins.com In-Reply-To: <010801c49dee$72cc5eb0$6401a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> References: <010801c49dee$72cc5eb0$6401a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1095546154.671.6.camel@elemental.DashEvil> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6 Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2004 22:22:34 +0000 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Please explain. X-BeenThere: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD SMP implementation group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 02:22:35 -0000 On Sun, 2004-09-19 at 02:14, timh@tjhawkins.com wrote: > Ask the FreeBSD developers, any of them with honesty should tell you or > proof me false. I dare you to proof this false, I would be so happy if you > did. Just because I'm using MS Mailer does not reflect whom I am. I have > only 1 MS workstation with 9 others unix. > > I expected a mature response from most of you, calling names is NOT the way > to resolve problems. I just want an answer to see if this is true. > > **Is it true**? This is what I've noticed myself and many high-scale > developers. > > Thank you 1) The burden of proof is on the person making the allegations. 2) Calling a troll on being a troll is mature. 3) If you believe it to be true, then don't use FreeBSD. Nobody is tying your hands here. You believe DragonFlyBSD to be superior? Then use it. Maybe I just don't see the big deal here, but the developers owe you nothing. From owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 19 02:30:38 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB6FC16A4CE; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 02:30:38 +0000 (GMT) Received: from ns0.secureanonymous.com (tjhawkins.com [64.232.254.34]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B03E43D49; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 02:30:38 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from timh@tjhawkins.com) Received: from cdm-66-76-83-77.fayt.cox-internet.com ([66.76.83.77] helo=yourw92p4bhlzg) by ns0.secureanonymous.com with smtp (Exim 4.34) id 1C8qY8-0006dN-40; Sat, 18 Sep 2004 20:31:32 -0500 Message-ID: <010e01c49df0$a5b79400$6401a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> From: To: "Chris Laverdure" References: <010801c49dee$72cc5eb0$6401a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> <1095546154.671.6.camel@elemental.DashEvil> Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2004 21:30:29 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2720.3000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - ns0.secureanonymous.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - freebsd.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - tjhawkins.com X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: cc: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Please explain. X-BeenThere: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD SMP implementation group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 02:30:38 -0000 Your taking it the wrong way, I was simply asking a question to the developers to confirm this. I have standardized on FreeBSD. I apologized if I made it seem like I was trolling, not my intention. If a business were to standardize on FreeBSD, they would love to know if the multithreading issues would be fixed completely correctly not just 'work-arounds'. sorry and thanks ----- Original Message ----- From: "Chris Laverdure" To: Cc: ; ; Sent: Saturday, September 18, 2004 5:22 PM Subject: Re: Please explain. > On Sun, 2004-09-19 at 02:14, timh@tjhawkins.com wrote: > > Ask the FreeBSD developers, any of them with honesty should tell you or > > proof me false. I dare you to proof this false, I would be so happy if you > > did. Just because I'm using MS Mailer does not reflect whom I am. I have > > only 1 MS workstation with 9 others unix. > > > > I expected a mature response from most of you, calling names is NOT the way > > to resolve problems. I just want an answer to see if this is true. > > > > **Is it true**? This is what I've noticed myself and many high-scale > > developers. > > > > Thank you > > 1) The burden of proof is on the person making the allegations. > > 2) Calling a troll on being a troll is mature. > > 3) If you believe it to be true, then don't use FreeBSD. Nobody is tying > your hands here. You believe DragonFlyBSD to be superior? Then use it. > > Maybe I just don't see the big deal here, but the developers owe you > nothing. > > > From owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 19 07:33:53 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D756C16A4CE; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 07:33:53 +0000 (GMT) Received: from ylpvm15.prodigy.net (ylpvm15-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.57.46]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9427E43D2D; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 07:33:53 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from julian@elischer.org) Received: from elischer.org (adsl-68-120-130-250.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [68.120.130.250])i8J7XqqM029572; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 03:33:53 -0400 Message-ID: <414D365E.2030200@elischer.org> Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 00:33:50 -0700 From: Julian Elischer User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.4b) Gecko/20030524 X-Accept-Language: en, hu MIME-Version: 1.0 To: timh@tjhawkins.com References: <00d001c49dd4$7382dc40$6401a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> In-Reply-To: <00d001c49dd4$7382dc40$6401a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: smp@freebsd.org cc: advocacy@freebsd.org cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Please explain. X-BeenThere: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD SMP implementation group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 07:33:54 -0000 timh@tjhawkins.com wrote: > 2 Major Issues: > > - FreeBSD has a processor affinity design issue thanks for the non combatative and diplomatically styled message? > > - The core kernel issues with FreeBSD is the horrible threading > support.There is so much crap in FreeBSD kernel. The multithreading issue in > freebsd has been delayed for nearly 6 years. They have just made work > arounds, not fixing the actual problem. It seems that the only real BSD that > has made big progress on the core issues is DragonflyBSD. Dragonfly BSD is a branch of freeBSD that we are all watching with great interest. The advantage that is available there is the decision to go back to teh drawing board and start from scratch, thereby breaking a lot, in the hope of being able to fix it again when teh parts afe all completed. It is a very interesting experiment and as such, FreeBSD developers in general are watching with interest. > > It appears that FreeBSD have a clear Multi-threading lock-in issue that > needs to be fixed. Not work arounds. According to many freebsd developers > nobody simply wants to fix this, is it true that the current smp work are > just 'work-arounds' not real fixing? Well if you could explain yourself in English I'd have more of a chance of answering your questions. The big challenge with FreeBSD and MP is that we have to get from a "here" (where there was no MP at all) the a "there" (where there is), while having every step of the way between being a runnable stable (within reason) system. This greatly limits how things are done. The current SMP work is not just "workarounds" but rather steps needed to get from A to B. Sometimes you can't see what the final picture is by looking at an intermediate step in isolation. > > The only thing holding FreeBSD back is the Multithreading issue. I wish you would explain this statement. It could be interpretted in so many ways that it really is almost meaningless. (Some of the interpretatiosn however are not..) > > Please clarify this. Sure.. how about you clarify your question first however. > > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-smp@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-smp > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-smp-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" From owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 19 07:51:38 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FFFB16A4CE; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 07:51:38 +0000 (GMT) Received: from ylpvm29.prodigy.net (ylpvm29-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.57.60]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56AD643D5C; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 07:51:38 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from julian@elischer.org) Received: from elischer.org (adsl-68-120-130-250.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [68.120.130.250])i8J7pMIV023949; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 03:51:23 -0400 Message-ID: <414D3A87.7080305@elischer.org> Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 00:51:35 -0700 From: Julian Elischer User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.4b) Gecko/20030524 X-Accept-Language: en, hu MIME-Version: 1.0 To: stheg olloydson References: <20040919015801.37222.qmail@web53908.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <20040919015801.37222.qmail@web53908.mail.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: questions@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org cc: timh@tjhawkins.com Subject: Re: Please explain. X-BeenThere: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD SMP implementation group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 07:51:38 -0000 I never saw this email from timh so I'm replying to this reply instead.. > > --- timh@tjhawkins.com wrote: > > >> processor affinity design issue.. >> >>i.e.. processes stay on the cpu they are >>spawned on..which is a big problem for mysql which explains why it >>performs better on other systems. yes We ALL know what processor affinity is. What makes you say we have not done anything aout this.? We have are working on a new scheduler (ULE) that is designed to implement processor affinity as a basic part of its functionality. When we are happy wih it we'll make it standard. >> >>Furthermore, the SMP issue is a common problem among many FreeBSD >>developers whom have told me the same, there is alot of this >>information all over the >>internet. FreeBSD is unable to perform good on multiple CPUs, >>the fixes are just work arounds. What have they told you? SMP in FreeBSD is coming along quite nicely as far as I see.. We now have native SMP scaleable threading in the default system, and larger and larger parts of the system ara able to take advantage of Multiple processors to parallelise their work. >> >>Unless if the freebsd community has just started to fix the >>multithreading issue, it's a huge problem. We've been working hard at it for 4 years (where did you get 6?) and we are seeing real results.. It sounds to me like you haven't actually tried it out yet. We hav elots to do yet, but there's been a lot of progress. BTW there is something going on with linux and mysql.. It looks like they have some optimisations in there that are not SMP related as their uniprocessor numbers are also better, and I've heard that when you run a linux mysql binary under freeBSD you also get similar improvements so My money is on the compile options or something ;-) >> Darwin does not >>have this problem whatsoever. Dawin was designed from the beginning for SMP. Mach was SMP capable from the firt release I ever worked on which was 2.0. >> >>Why do I care? This is a silly question. I have 2 windows PCs here, I >>have 9 >>other workstations that all run unix. I am a server manager and I do >>consulting work for freebsd/linux. Windows came free so why not? I >>don't do business on it. >> >>I've been a really huge FreeBSD supporter.. but I am really concerned >>about this issue which has been an issue for so long. I suggest that you follow what is actually going on rather than listenning to "the internet". >> >>thanks, >>tim h. > From owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 19 09:10:18 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A921616A4CE; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 09:10:18 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtps-out1.xs4all.nl (smtps-out1.xs4all.nl [194.109.24.62]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24FF043D31; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 09:10:18 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from mhellwig@xs4all.nl) Received: from [10.0.0.173] (xinagnet.xs4all.nl [80.126.243.229]) (authenticated bits=0)i8J9AFTJ000530; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 11:10:15 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <414D4CEC.1050400@xs4all.nl> Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 11:10:04 +0200 From: "Martin P. Hellwig" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; DragonFly i386; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040918 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: timh@tjhawkins.com References: <010801c49dee$72cc5eb0$6401a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> <1095546154.671.6.camel@elemental.DashEvil> <010e01c49df0$a5b79400$6401a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> In-Reply-To: <010e01c49df0$a5b79400$6401a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: Chris Laverdure cc: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Please explain. X-BeenThere: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD SMP implementation group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 09:10:18 -0000 timh@tjhawkins.com wrote: >Your taking it the wrong way, I was simply asking a question to the >developers to confirm this. > >I have standardized on FreeBSD. > >I apologized if I made it seem like I was trolling, not my intention. > >If a business were to standardize on FreeBSD, they would love to know if the >multithreading issues would be fixed completely correctly not just >'work-arounds'. > > Well, fair enough but it still comes down to if you have a other OS which does what you need than use that OS. But perhaps you require the BSD license for you biz? Actually I'm not very knowledged (far from) about design and multithread issues however from what I read is that mulitple CPU's is a real pain and the one who managed it the best is SUN (only read that - not sure about it), but there working 10 years on this issues and get paid for it. So what can you filter out of this? If you need your idea of multithreading, then let it develop and give it to the BSD community, otherwise use/buy an other OS. That multithreading issue is indeed a touchy point because it is so open for other interpretation, which one group sees a fine solution is for the other a low-profile dirty hack. Some hang more over to a clean design and other like designs but prefer something working. DragonFly has indeed taken a different approach about solving this issue, however which OS will provide the best solution will be proven over time. So IMHO your original question is not trolling but you simply ask it a couple of years to early :-) -- mph From owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 19 10:13:05 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20EFD16A4CF for ; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 10:13:05 +0000 (GMT) Received: from santiago.pacific.net.sg (santiago.pacific.net.sg [203.120.90.135]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id EB45043D49 for ; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 10:13:03 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from oceanare@pacific.net.sg) Received: (qmail 18505 invoked from network); 19 Sep 2004 10:13:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO maxwell6.pacific.net.sg) (203.120.90.212) by santiago with SMTP; 19 Sep 2004 10:13:02 -0000 Received: from [192.168.0.107] ([210.24.202.141]) by maxwell6.pacific.net.sg with ESMTP <20040919101301.SEYL17051.maxwell6.pacific.net.sg@[192.168.0.107]>; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 18:13:01 +0800 Message-ID: <414D5BA6.5080906@pacific.net.sg> Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 18:12:54 +0800 From: Erich Dollansky User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.3 (X11/20040913) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Martin P. Hellwig" References: <010801c49dee$72cc5eb0$6401a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> <1095546154.671.6.camel@elemental.DashEvil> <010e01c49df0$a5b79400$6401a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> <414D4CEC.1050400@xs4all.nl> In-Reply-To: <414D4CEC.1050400@xs4all.nl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Please explain. X-BeenThere: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD SMP implementation group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 10:13:05 -0000 Hi, Martin P. Hellwig wrote: > timh@tjhawkins.com wrote: > > > Well, fair enough but it still comes down to if you have a other OS > which does what you need than use that OS. SMP support is only one thing to consider. > But perhaps you require the BSD license for you biz? > Actually I'm not very knowledged (far from) about design and multithread > issues however from what I read is that mulitple CPU's is a real pain > and the one who managed it the best is SUN (only read that - not sure > about it), but there working 10 years on this issues and get paid for The main difference is that they live from selling the hardware. If their operating system would not support their very own hardware up to the extent, their sales would drop. Sun's support for multiple CPUs includes also things which are not even supported by standard x86 hardware. Try to exchange a CPU while your PC based machine is running. Erich From owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 19 02:34:35 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B19D516A4CE; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 02:34:35 +0000 (GMT) Received: from dan.emsphone.com (dan.emsphone.com [199.67.51.101]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6911243D45; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 02:34:35 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dan@dan.emsphone.com) Received: (from dan@localhost) by dan.emsphone.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) id i8J2YWJE028156; Sat, 18 Sep 2004 21:34:32 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from dan) Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2004 21:34:32 -0500 From: Dan Nelson To: timh@tjhawkins.com Message-ID: <20040919023432.GA7981@dan.emsphone.com> References: <010801c49dee$72cc5eb0$6401a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> <1095546154.671.6.camel@elemental.DashEvil> <010e01c49df0$a5b79400$6401a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <010e01c49df0$a5b79400$6401a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> X-OS: FreeBSD 5.3-BETA4 X-message-flag: Outlook Error User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 12:26:25 +0000 cc: freebsd-threads@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Please explain. X-BeenThere: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD SMP implementation group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 02:34:36 -0000 In the last episode (Sep 18), timh@tjhawkins.com said: > Your taking it the wrong way, I was simply asking a question to the > developers to confirm this. > > I have standardized on FreeBSD. > > I apologized if I made it seem like I was trolling, not my intention. > > If a business were to standardize on FreeBSD, they would love to know if the > multithreading issues would be fixed completely correctly not just > 'work-arounds'. So far you have only mentioned the word "issues". Do you have a particular one in mind? Maybe your questions would be better answered on the freebsd-threads list. Make sure you include your OS version, threads library you are using, the application you are using, and your specific problem. CC: redirected appropriately. -- Dan Nelson dnelson@allantgroup.com From owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 19 13:07:45 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E7FA16A4CE; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 13:07:45 +0000 (GMT) Received: from internet.potentialtech.com (h-66-167-251-6.phlapafg.covad.net [66.167.251.6]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6F1D43D2D; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 13:07:44 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from wmoran@potentialtech.com) Received: from working.potentialtech.com (pa-plum-cmts1e-68-68-113-64.pittpa.adelphia.net [68.68.113.64]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by internet.potentialtech.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A8D169A87; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 09:07:43 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 09:07:42 -0400 From: Bill Moran To: Message-Id: <20040919090742.5ad5e124.wmoran@potentialtech.com> In-Reply-To: <010801c49dee$72cc5eb0$6401a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> References: <010801c49dee$72cc5eb0$6401a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> Organization: Potential Technologies X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.12 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-portbld-freebsd4.9) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: TROLLING!! (Re: Please explain.) X-BeenThere: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD SMP implementation group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 13:07:45 -0000 Look. It's simple. Don't come on to a FreeBSD mailing list calling FreeBSD names, and then get upset when people call you a Troll. If you don't like how FreeBSD works or how it's being developed, use something else, or help the developers improve it. Otherwise, get the hell off this mailing list. Go to slashdot or something. wrote: > Ask the FreeBSD developers, any of them with honesty should tell you or > proof me false. I dare you to proof this false, I would be so happy if you > did. Just because I'm using MS Mailer does not reflect whom I am. I have > only 1 MS workstation with 9 others unix. > > I expected a mature response from most of you, calling names is NOT the way > to resolve problems. I just want an answer to see if this is true. > > **Is it true**? This is what I've noticed myself and many high-scale > developers. > > Thank you > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "steveb99" > To: > Cc: ; ; > > Sent: Saturday, September 18, 2004 8:09 PM > Subject: RE: Please explain. > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > > > [mailto:owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of > > > Emanuel Strobl > > > Sent: Saturday, September 18, 2004 5:41 PM > > > To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > > > Cc: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org; freebsd-smp@freebsd.org; > > > timh@tjhawkins.com > > > Subject: Re: Please explain. > > > > > > Am Sonntag, 19. September 2004 01:08 schrieb timh@tjhawkins.com: > > > > 2 Major Issues: > > > > > > Why should one answer to this email? Use what ever you think > > > qualifies your needs! > > > > > > > Just a troll, look at all the cross-posting. > > > > Steve Barnette > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" -- Bill Moran Potential Technologies http://www.potentialtech.com From owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 19 13:13:55 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22F2816A4CE; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 13:13:55 +0000 (GMT) Received: from server1.ultratrends.com (server1.ultratrends.com [205.206.59.239]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A985843D41; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 13:13:54 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from trodat@ultratrends.com) Received: from server1.ultratrends.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) i8JCDrnH005889; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 06:13:53 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from trodat@ultratrends.com) Received: from localhost (trodat@localhost)i8JCDr1B005886; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 06:13:53 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from trodat@ultratrends.com) X-Authentication-Warning: server1.ultratrends.com: trodat owned process doing -bs Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 06:13:53 -0600 (MDT) From: Technical Director To: timh@tjhawkins.com In-Reply-To: <010e01c49df0$a5b79400$6401a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> Message-ID: <20040919055918.A5844@server1.ultratrends.com> References: <010801c49dee$72cc5eb0$6401a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> <010e01c49df0$a5b79400$6401a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Please explain. (What is HawkinsOS?) X-BeenThere: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD SMP implementation group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 13:13:55 -0000 Err, maybe you should use ... HawkinsOS??? T.J.HAWKINS Secure, Stable, Supported Operating System... I really enjoyed that. Maybe this inquiry is to get the developers to work out HawkinsOS, whatever version of FreeBSD you sed'd s/FreeBSD/HawkinsOS/g, problems with multi-threading? My troll addition. PS Your site says you are a Programmer, providing proof of concepts for what you are discussing shouldn't be to hard. *** On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 timh@tjhawkins.com wrote: > Your taking it the wrong way, I was simply asking a question to the > developers to confirm this. > > I have standardized on FreeBSD. > > I apologized if I made it seem like I was trolling, not my intention. > > If a business were to standardize on FreeBSD, they would love to know if the > multithreading issues would be fixed completely correctly not just > 'work-arounds'. > > > sorry and thanks > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Chris Laverdure" > To: > Cc: ; ; > > Sent: Saturday, September 18, 2004 5:22 PM > Subject: Re: Please explain. > > > > On Sun, 2004-09-19 at 02:14, timh@tjhawkins.com wrote: > > > Ask the FreeBSD developers, any of them with honesty should tell you or > > > proof me false. I dare you to proof this false, I would be so happy if > you > > > did. Just because I'm using MS Mailer does not reflect whom I am. I have > > > only 1 MS workstation with 9 others unix. > > > > > > I expected a mature response from most of you, calling names is NOT the > way > > > to resolve problems. I just want an answer to see if this is true. > > > > > > **Is it true**? This is what I've noticed myself and many high-scale > > > developers. > > > > > > Thank you > > > > 1) The burden of proof is on the person making the allegations. > > > > 2) Calling a troll on being a troll is mature. > > > > 3) If you believe it to be true, then don't use FreeBSD. Nobody is tying > > your hands here. You believe DragonFlyBSD to be superior? Then use it. > > > > Maybe I just don't see the big deal here, but the developers owe you > > nothing. > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > From owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 19 14:57:02 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61A0916A4CE; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 14:57:02 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.broadpark.no (mail.broadpark.no [217.13.4.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CF1D43D3F; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 14:57:02 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from des@des.no) Received: from dwp.des.no (37.80-203-228.nextgentel.com [80.203.228.37]) by mail.broadpark.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 974BF36D0; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 16:57:41 +0200 (MEST) Received: by dwp.des.no (Postfix, from userid 2602) id CBFA1B85E; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 16:57:00 +0200 (CEST) To: References: <00d001c49dd4$7382dc40$6401a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> From: des@des.no (=?iso-8859-1?q?Dag-Erling_Sm=F8rgrav?=) Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 16:57:00 +0200 In-Reply-To: <00d001c49dd4$7382dc40$6401a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> (timh@tjhawkins.com's message of "Sat, 18 Sep 2004 18:08:40 -0500") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1006 (Gnus v5.10.6) Emacs/21.3 (berkeley-unix) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable cc: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Please explain. X-BeenThere: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD SMP implementation group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 14:57:02 -0000 writes: > It appears that FreeBSD have a clear Multi-threading lock-in issue > that needs to be fixed. Not work arounds. According to many freebsd > developers nobody simply wants to fix this, is it true that the > current smp work are just 'work-arounds' not real fixing? Did David Rhodus put you up to this? You should just tell him to do his own dirty work. BTW, the FreeBSD Foundation (http://www.freebsd-foundation.org/) is an independent legal entity which supports, but is not identical with, the FreeBSD Project (http://www.freebsd.org/). Furthermore, be advised that significant portions of FreeBSD were released under licenses that include terms like those reproduced below, and that your web site, http://www.hawkinsos.com/, is in breach of those terms. * 3. All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this software * must display the following acknowledgements: * This product includes software developed by Jason R. Thorpe * for And Communications, http://www.and.com/ .\" 3. All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this software .\" must display the following acknowledgement: .\" This product includes software developed by Winning Strategies, In= c. # 3. All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this software # must display the following acknowledgement: # This product includes software developed by the NetBSD # Foundation, Inc. and its contributors. * 3. All advertising materials mentioning features or use of this software * must display the following acknowledgement: * "This product includes cryptographic software written by * Eric Young (eay@cryptsoft.com)" DES --=20 Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav - des@des.no From owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 19 15:15:08 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37CF516A4CE; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 15:15:08 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mindfields.energyhq.es.eu.org (73.Red-213-97-200.pooles.rima-tde.net [213.97.200.73]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8328743D1D; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 15:14:57 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from flynn@energyhq.es.eu.org) Received: from scienide (scienide.energyhq.es.eu.org [192.168.100.1]) by mindfields.energyhq.es.eu.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6E62735821; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 17:14:39 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 17:14:22 +0200 From: Miguel Mendez To: des@des.no (Dag-Erling =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?=) Message-Id: <20040919171422.155a98c3.flynn@energyhq.es.eu.org> In-Reply-To: References: <00d001c49dd4$7382dc40$6401a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.9.12-gtk2-20040622 (GTK+ 2.4.9; i386-portbld-freebsd5.3) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha1"; boundary="Signature=_Sun__19_Sep_2004_17_14_22_+0200_dodLY9A0D50DifA=" cc: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org cc: timh@tjhawkins.com Subject: Re: Please explain. X-BeenThere: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD SMP implementation group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 15:15:08 -0000 --Signature=_Sun__19_Sep_2004_17_14_22_+0200_dodLY9A0D50DifA= Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 16:57:00 +0200 des@des.no (Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav) wrote: Hi, > writes: > > It appears that FreeBSD have a clear Multi-threading lock-in issue > > that needs to be fixed. Not work arounds. According to many freebsd > > developers nobody simply wants to fix this, is it true that the > > current smp work are just 'work-arounds' not real fixing? >=20 > Did David Rhodus put you up to this? You should just tell him to do > his own dirty work. Why don't you and Bosko leave the DragonFlyBSD people alone? I don't get it. Are you jealous of their work or what? You're not helping inter-camp relations if you pick on them every time you have an opportunity. I'm sure David would post anything he wants to without resorting to silly games. Cheers, --=20 Miguel Mendez http://www.energyhq.es.eu.org PGP Key: 0xDC8514F1 Note: All HTML and non-english mail goes to /dev/null --Signature=_Sun__19_Sep_2004_17_14_22_+0200_dodLY9A0D50DifA= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFBTaJRnLctrNyFFPERAgUDAJ9o4JmXjrj8Uw345a5RmFwlYGqcHwCfT2pH /gIsQ8ZKcmHwHY3gkFFyBgo= =GVB3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Signature=_Sun__19_Sep_2004_17_14_22_+0200_dodLY9A0D50DifA=-- From owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 19 15:30:06 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 883EF16A4CE; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 15:30:06 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pittgoth.com (14.zlnp1.xdsl.nauticom.net [209.195.149.111]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E95DA43D1F; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 15:30:05 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from trhodes@FreeBSD.org) Received: from localhost (64-144-75-99.client.dsl.net [64.144.75.99]) (authenticated bits=0) by pittgoth.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i8JFT4ex008677 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Sun, 19 Sep 2004 11:29:05 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from trhodes@FreeBSD.org) Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 11:29:39 -0400 From: Tom Rhodes To: Miguel Mendez Message-Id: <20040919112939.66713788@localhost> In-Reply-To: <20040919171422.155a98c3.flynn@energyhq.es.eu.org> References: <00d001c49dd4$7382dc40$6401a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> <20040919171422.155a98c3.flynn@energyhq.es.eu.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 0.9.12 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-portbld-freebsd5.2) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable cc: Dag-Erling =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Sm=F8rgrav?= cc: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.org cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org cc: timh@tjhawkins.com cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Please explain. X-BeenThere: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD SMP implementation group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 15:30:06 -0000 On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 17:14:22 +0200 Miguel Mendez wrote: > On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 16:57:00 +0200 > des@des.no (Dag-Erling Sm=F8rgrav) wrote: >=20 > Hi, >=20 > > writes: > > > It appears that FreeBSD have a clear Multi-threading lock-in issue > > > that needs to be fixed. Not work arounds. According to many freebsd > > > developers nobody simply wants to fix this, is it true that the > > > current smp work are just 'work-arounds' not real fixing? > >=20 > > Did David Rhodus put you up to this? You should just tell him to do > > his own dirty work. >=20 > Why don't you and Bosko leave the DragonFlyBSD people alone? I don't get > it. Are you jealous of their work or what? You're not helping > inter-camp relations if you pick on them every time you have an > opportunity. Oh back off; you obviously have only a small part of the story. >=20 > I'm sure David would post anything he wants to without resorting to > silly games. You're correct; he would just slander throughout forums such as /. and the like; that is sooo much better then coming here. Yet, it does keep our lists a little cleaner. --=20 Tom Rhodes From owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 19 15:52:52 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C5ED16A4CE; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 15:52:52 +0000 (GMT) Received: from post-23.mail.nl.demon.net (post-23.mail.nl.demon.net [194.159.73.193]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26F6843D2D; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 15:52:52 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from dodell@sitetronics.com) Received: from gibsonnet.demon.nl ([82.161.57.57]:14633 helo=[192.168.1.19]) by post-23.mail.nl.demon.net with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1C93ze-000DBF-RX; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 15:52:50 +0000 Message-ID: <414DAB53.4010902@sitetronics.com> Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 17:52:51 +0200 From: "Devon H. O'Dell" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (Windows/20040913) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tom Rhodes References: <00d001c49dd4$7382dc40$6401a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> <20040919171422.155a98c3.flynn@energyhq.es.eu.org> <20040919112939.66713788@localhost> In-Reply-To: <20040919112939.66713788@localhost> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.org cc: Miguel Mendez cc: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.org cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org cc: timh@tjhawkins.com Subject: Re: Please explain. X-BeenThere: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD SMP implementation group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 15:52:52 -0000 Tom Rhodes wrote: > On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 17:14:22 +0200 > Miguel Mendez wrote: > > >>On Sun, 19 Sep 2004 16:57:00 +0200 >>des@des.no (Dag-Erling Smørgrav) wrote: >> >>Hi, >> >> >>> writes: >>> >>>>It appears that FreeBSD have a clear Multi-threading lock-in issue >>>>that needs to be fixed. Not work arounds. According to many freebsd >>>>developers nobody simply wants to fix this, is it true that the >>>>current smp work are just 'work-arounds' not real fixing? >>> >>>Did David Rhodus put you up to this? You should just tell him to do >>>his own dirty work. >> >>Why don't you and Bosko leave the DragonFlyBSD people alone? I don't get >>it. Are you jealous of their work or what? You're not helping >>inter-camp relations if you pick on them every time you have an >>opportunity. > > > Oh back off; you obviously have only a small part of the story. Or perhaps he notices that DES pulled an attack out of thin air, which was unprovoked. The best offense, in this case, is to STFU about your personal feelings about the works of another project. Nobody's getting very far making these attacks. >>I'm sure David would post anything he wants to without resorting to >>silly games. > > > You're correct; he would just slander throughout forums such > as /. and the like; that is sooo much better then coming here. > > Yet, it does keep our lists a little cleaner. > Funny, this entire thread only seems to be polluting the lists. How about you (yes, all you who shout ``don't feed the trolls'') actually _stop_ feeding them for once (or give the guy a reasonable answer; his question was horribly misinformed, but you would have shut him up sooner with facts, rather than attacks), stop making baseless claims, stop attacking other camps, stop attacking each other. I'm sure I'm going to get a bunch of cruft for this. But seriously, quit acking like a bunch of damned 5 year old girls, pulling each other's hair and grow the hell up! --Devon From owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 19 17:09:14 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92AA216A4CE; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 17:09:14 +0000 (GMT) Received: from ns0.secureanonymous.com (tjhawkins.com [64.232.254.34]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F41C43D45; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 17:09:14 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from timh@tjhawkins.com) Received: from cdm-66-76-83-77.fayt.cox-internet.com ([66.76.83.77] helo=yourw92p4bhlzg) by ns0.secureanonymous.com with smtp (Exim 4.34) id 1C94GO-0007Ui-1L; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 11:10:08 -0500 Message-ID: <014101c49e6b$61dbcaa0$6401a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> From: To: "Robert Watson" References: Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 12:09:07 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2720.3000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - ns0.secureanonymous.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - freebsd.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - tjhawkins.com X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: cc: freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.org cc: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.org cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Please explain. X-BeenThere: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD SMP implementation group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 17:09:14 -0000 Mr. Watson, you have addressed my questions greatly and I do agree that it will take years to successfully tackle the issue but when FreeBSD has had less funding than Linux it's obvious that it's developers have made huge progress and that I'm proud of. Your response was alot better than yelling the word troll or other things. FreeBSD is aware of the issues apparently and is working. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Watson" To: Sent: Sunday, September 19, 2004 11:31 AM Subject: Re: Please explain. > > On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 timh@tjhawkins.com wrote: > > > 2 Major Issues: > > > > - FreeBSD has a processor affinity design issue > > Odd statement, but I'm not sure what it means. FreeBSD uses an SMP model > similar to that used by Sun, SGI, and other operating system and hardware > vendors who are clearly aware of affinity concerns, and who have operating > systems that scale pretty amazingly on SMP and non-SMP multi-processor > systems. > > > - The core kernel issues with FreeBSD is the horrible threading > > support.There is so much crap in FreeBSD kernel. The multithreading > > issue in freebsd has been delayed for nearly 6 years. They have just > > made work arounds, not fixing the actual problem. It seems that the only > > real BSD that has made big progress on the core issues is DragonflyBSD. > > This is also an odd statement. FreeBSD is following a well-understood and > widely implemented model for SMP scalability, although somewhat refined as > a result of starting on it after the R&D curve that Sun, IBM, SGI, HP, > etc, got to pay for. However, any major software project of this sort > takes years to complete -- Linux is only just getting to reasonable SMP > scalability after a good 6+ years of investment by some pretty major > players. Doesn't help that Linus turns down patches from SGI that help a > lot though :-). > > BTW, I've spent a lot of time looking at the DragonFly approach, and I met > with Matt for quite a while at USENIX to talk to him about the approach. I > have a number of concerns about it -- I think the premise is very > interesting, but that the results aren't yet there to prove the model. In > particular, there's a huge volume of code in their system that has not > been addressed, and a lot of complexity that will need to be handled > before the SMP primitives they're using have proven that they offer the > desired performance advantage. We have the opportunity of using a hybrid > model, and have been exploring some of the ideas present in DFBSD (and, > one should point out, many other SMP systems). > > A lot of other systems have opted to use elements similar to those > primitives, but in a much more limited way due to the performance costs. > For example, locking services into particular CPUs prevents the scheduler > from balancing load between the CPUs in an service-transparent way. In > the DFBSD model, load balancing must be implemented separately for each > service, requiring extensive modifications to the services. I.e., the > model may indeed offer benefits, but the cost of doing the work will be > high, and the time to complete it long. We'll adopt elements of the > design as they prove to make sense, as we do with all other open source > operating systems (and they do with us!). > > > It appears that FreeBSD have a clear Multi-threading lock-in issue that > > needs to be fixed. Not work arounds. According to many freebsd > > developers nobody simply wants to fix this, is it true that the current > > smp work are just 'work-arounds' not real fixing? > > > > The only thing holding FreeBSD back is the Multithreading issue. > > I think this is a pretty odd claim -- FreeBSD 5.x scales much better than > 4.x on multiple processors, allowing large parts of the kernel to run in > parallel on different CPUs. The performance results are there, showing > 1.4x - 1.6x speedup in SMP tasks with MySQL. > > I saw elsewhere in the thread that someone suggested Darwin doesn't have > SMP problems to address. Darwin is actually in an almost identical > position to us, having basic VM, kernel memory allocation, and scheduling > outside the Giant lock. They took the route of breaking the BSD parts of > their kernel into two "funnels", the network funnel, and "the rest". Our > 5.3 release will actually be much better off than Darwin on SMP by > allowing many threads of the network stack to run on different CPUs, more > support for preemption and low-latency operation. I've talked with Apple > pretty extensively about their SMP work, and met with their kernel team to > discuss their work. > > Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects > robert@fledge.watson.org Principal Research Scientist, McAfee Research > > > From owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 19 17:12:08 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF7B116A4CE for ; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 17:12:08 +0000 (GMT) Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [204.156.12.50]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 642CC43D49 for ; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 17:12:08 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Received: from fledge.watson.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fledge.watson.org (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id i8JHBYhv020681; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 13:11:34 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Received: from localhost (robert@localhost)i8JHBYRX020678; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 13:11:34 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 13:11:33 -0400 (EDT) From: Robert Watson X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: Julian Elischer In-Reply-To: <414D3A87.7080305@elischer.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Subject: Darwin SMP (was: Re: ... blah blah blah ...) X-BeenThere: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD SMP implementation group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 17:12:08 -0000 On Sun, 19 Sep 2004, Julian Elischer wrote: > >> Darwin does not > >>have this problem whatsoever. > > Dawin was designed from the beginning for SMP. Mach was SMP capable from > the firt release I ever worked on which was 2.0. Actually, Darwin has substantial SMP "problems" in the sense that there is pretty limited parallelism in the current released version at higher levels in the kernel. Lower levels make use of the largely SMP-safe Mach components (scheduler, virtual memory, memory management, Mach IPC, etc). At the BSD layer of the kernel, there are basically two Giant locks (funnels) associated respectively with "the network stack" and "the rest". I.e., Darwin basically runs with pretty similar SMP properties to 5.1 and 5.2 of FreeBSD: low level stuff Giant-free, and a lot of the higher level stuff (which matters a lot) requiring the logical equivilent of Giant. The one difference really lies in their extensive use of Mach IPC, which was MPSAFE (our pipes, etc were MPSAFE but they're not used in the same way). My understanding is that Apple is working hard to move towards a more fine-grained locking model in Tiger (due mid-next-year) -- some of their marketing literature suggests that it's based on the FreeBSD 5.x SMP, but my understanding is that a fair amount of it was developed simultaneous to our SMPng work, so I'm not sure how much explicit code reuse there will be. The low-level Mach synchronization primitives (wait queues, mutexes, etc) are pretty similar to the ones we have in SMPng (not a cooincidence), but they've lacked higher level primitives such as condition variables and more general purpose reader-writer locks. Obviously, I'd welcome their taking any and all code they want to from FreeBSD :-). I welcome a move to more explicit synchronization and locking in Darwin, as it will help to identify and close a substantial volume of race conditions that currently exist. In particular, I've seen a number of races between the two compartments of the BSD parts of their kernel where it's not clear whether structure fields are protected by the kernel or network funnel. Since we use Darwin extensively at work, we've run into this a fair amount. We ported FreeBSD SMPng condition variables to Darwin as part of our port of the MAC Framework to that platform in part to get to a more mature synchronization model on Darwin. We looked at, but didn't implement, a port of WITNESS to Darwin (where it is sorely needed, since the lock orders in Mach are basically undocumented). Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects robert@fledge.watson.org Principal Research Scientist, McAfee Research From owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 19 17:19:04 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87DDB16A4CE for ; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 17:19:04 +0000 (GMT) Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [204.156.12.50]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5EE243D55 for ; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 17:19:03 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Received: from fledge.watson.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fledge.watson.org (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id i8JHIUN1020830; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 13:18:30 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Received: from localhost (robert@localhost)i8JHITc4020827; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 13:18:29 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 13:18:29 -0400 (EDT) From: Robert Watson X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: Julian Elischer In-Reply-To: <414D3A87.7080305@elischer.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII cc: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Subject: Tried and tested SMP model (was: Re: ... blah blah ...) X-BeenThere: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD SMP implementation group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 17:19:04 -0000 On Sun, 19 Sep 2004, Julian Elischer wrote: > >>Furthermore, the SMP issue is a common problem among many FreeBSD > >>developers whom have told me the same, there is alot of this > >>information all over the > >>internet. FreeBSD is unable to perform good on multiple CPUs, > >>the fixes are just work arounds. > > What have they told you? SMP in FreeBSD is coming along quite nicely as > far as I see.. We now have native SMP scaleable threading in the default > system, and larger and larger parts of the system ara able to take > advantage of Multiple processors to parallelise their work. And our SMP/threading model is hardly unproven -- substantial parts of the architecture were based on the extensively documented experiences of the SunOS/Solaris SMP work, Mach SMP, SGI SMP, BSD/OS SMP, Linux SMP, etc. Many of these systems have demonstrated excellent scalability on SMP and NUMA systems (some would say: rediculous scalability), as well as make very effective use of processor affinity. While the work of re-writing a kernel to use explicit synchronization is pretty expensive, and work on the scheduler requires a lot of hard thinking, it's not as though we're exploring uncharted waters that might contain unidentified monsters. And the hardest part of the current SMP work isn't putting in the locking primitives, it's identifying and adapting the synchronization requirements of the components, which is work that has to be done regardless of what actual SMP model is suggested. Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects robert@fledge.watson.org Principal Research Scientist, McAfee Research From owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 19 17:56:49 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64D0416A4CE; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 17:56:49 +0000 (GMT) Received: from ns0.secureanonymous.com (tjhawkins.com [64.232.254.34]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DC98A43D41; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 17:56:48 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from timh@tjhawkins.com) Received: from cdm-66-76-83-77.fayt.cox-internet.com ([66.76.83.77] helo=yourw92p4bhlzg) by ns0.secureanonymous.com with smtp (Exim 4.34) id 1C950O-0004XG-HH; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 11:57:43 -0500 Message-ID: <014d01c49e72$05fcf220$6401a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> From: To: "Technical Director" References: <010801c49dee$72cc5eb0$6401a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> <1095546154.671.6.camel@elemental.DashEvil> <010e01c49df0$a5b79400$6401a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> <20040919055918.A5844@server1.ultratrends.com> Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 12:56:35 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2720.3000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - ns0.secureanonymous.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - freebsd.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - tjhawkins.com X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: cc: freebsd-advocacy@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Please explain. (What is HawkinsOS?) X-BeenThere: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD SMP implementation group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 17:56:49 -0000 Ok, I just wanted an answer and I already got a *few* good answers and I DONT WANT A WAR. Yes, HawkinsOS is FreeBSD 5.x based and the goal is to donate back to the community, but this is irrelevant! The questions were not even over HawkinsOS. Let's all refrain from starting a huge arguement I have already received my answers. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Technical Director" To: Cc: ; ; Sent: Sunday, September 19, 2004 7:13 AM Subject: Re: Please explain. (What is HawkinsOS?) > > Err, maybe you should use ... HawkinsOS??? > > T.J.HAWKINS Secure, Stable, Supported Operating System... > > I really enjoyed that. > > Maybe this inquiry is to get the developers to work out HawkinsOS, > whatever version of FreeBSD you sed'd s/FreeBSD/HawkinsOS/g, problems > with multi-threading? > > My troll addition. > > PS > > Your site says you are a Programmer, providing proof of concepts for what > you are discussing shouldn't be to hard. > > *** > > On Sat, 18 Sep 2004 timh@tjhawkins.com wrote: > > > Your taking it the wrong way, I was simply asking a question to the > > developers to confirm this. > > > > I have standardized on FreeBSD. > > > > I apologized if I made it seem like I was trolling, not my intention. > > > > If a business were to standardize on FreeBSD, they would love to know if the > > multithreading issues would be fixed completely correctly not just > > 'work-arounds'. > > > > > > sorry and thanks > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "Chris Laverdure" > > To: > > Cc: ; ; > > > > Sent: Saturday, September 18, 2004 5:22 PM > > Subject: Re: Please explain. > > > > > > > On Sun, 2004-09-19 at 02:14, timh@tjhawkins.com wrote: > > > > Ask the FreeBSD developers, any of them with honesty should tell you or > > > > proof me false. I dare you to proof this false, I would be so happy if > > you > > > > did. Just because I'm using MS Mailer does not reflect whom I am. I have > > > > only 1 MS workstation with 9 others unix. > > > > > > > > I expected a mature response from most of you, calling names is NOT the > > way > > > > to resolve problems. I just want an answer to see if this is true. > > > > > > > > **Is it true**? This is what I've noticed myself and many high-scale > > > > developers. > > > > > > > > Thank you > > > > > > 1) The burden of proof is on the person making the allegations. > > > > > > 2) Calling a troll on being a troll is mature. > > > > > > 3) If you believe it to be true, then don't use FreeBSD. Nobody is tying > > > your hands here. You believe DragonFlyBSD to be superior? Then use it. > > > > > > Maybe I just don't see the big deal here, but the developers owe you > > > nothing. > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > > > From owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 19 20:48:35 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19A1516A4CE; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 20:48:35 +0000 (GMT) Received: from ns0.secureanonymous.com (tjhawkins.com [64.232.254.34]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 859C943D46; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 20:48:34 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from timh@tjhawkins.com) Received: from cdm-66-76-83-77.fayt.cox-internet.com ([66.76.83.77] helo=yourw92p4bhlzg) by ns0.secureanonymous.com with smtp (Exim 4.34) id 1C97gd-0004Sc-1k; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 14:49:27 -0500 Message-ID: <018b01c49e8a$04fb73c0$6401a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> From: To: "Julian Elischer" References: <00d001c49dd4$7382dc40$6401a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> <414D365E.2030200@elischer.org> Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 15:48:25 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2720.3000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000 X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - ns0.secureanonymous.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - freebsd.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [0 0] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - tjhawkins.com X-Source: X-Source-Args: X-Source-Dir: cc: smp@freebsd.org cc: advocacy@freebsd.org cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Please explain. X-BeenThere: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD SMP implementation group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 20:48:35 -0000 My question regarding the 2 extremely major flaws in FreeBSD are being addressed as I have learned from mature FreeBSD developers, due to my question. Therefore many linux-fanatics who are focussed on an only-linux world will no longer be able to use this issue. These two stop-gap items will be at the forefront of the work for the next year, along with a major move to start removing the BGL (Big Giant Lock, also known as the MP lock) from code inherited from 4.x ...that is the one mentioned on dragonfly page too Regarding the people who e-mailed me regarding mySQL on FreeBSD just Google it: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&q=performance+freebsd+mysql ..as you can see there are issues but they are being solved. Furthermore... This age actually tells me that my assertions are true regarding freeBSD's problems: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/5-roadmap/article.html This page also explains to me that these problems will be completely fixed and that once FreeBSD 5.x is completely finished and stable that It will be the best choice in operating systems. I knew I wasn't trolling, but too many people sent me horrible hatred messages. Furthermore: HawkinsOS is a modified FreeBSD 5.x that retains the BSD license and continues to give credit to the FreeBSD group, as well as once this project is started will donate to the organization... So why would so many people from so many lists say I'm doing illegal licesing things, etc.? It also retains complete compatibilty to FreeBSD, which I've made sure to help the FreeBSD project, as this is one issue where linux has been successful. I'm a FreeBSD fan and I always will be and I'm glade this issues are being taken care of and I understand the money wasn't there like it was for Linux. Please do not get the idea that I was trying to harass and troll. I'm certainly glade we got that all taken care of. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Julian Elischer" To: Cc: ; ; Sent: Sunday, September 19, 2004 2:33 AM Subject: Re: Please explain. > timh@tjhawkins.com wrote: > > 2 Major Issues: > > > > - FreeBSD has a processor affinity design issue > > > thanks for the non combatative and diplomatically styled message? > > > > > - The core kernel issues with FreeBSD is the horrible threading > > support.There is so much crap in FreeBSD kernel. The multithreading issue in > > freebsd has been delayed for nearly 6 years. They have just made work > > arounds, not fixing the actual problem. It seems that the only real BSD that > > has made big progress on the core issues is DragonflyBSD. > > Dragonfly BSD is a branch of freeBSD that we are all watching with great > interest. The advantage that is available there is the decision to go back > to teh drawing board and start from scratch, thereby breaking a lot, in the > hope of being able to fix it again when teh parts afe all completed. It > is a very interesting experiment and as such, FreeBSD developers in general > are watching with interest. > > > > > It appears that FreeBSD have a clear Multi-threading lock-in issue that > > needs to be fixed. Not work arounds. According to many freebsd developers > > nobody simply wants to fix this, is it true that the current smp work are > > just 'work-arounds' not real fixing? > > Well if you could explain yourself in English I'd have more of a chance > of answering your questions. The big challenge with FreeBSD and MP is that > we have to get from a "here" (where there was no MP at all) the a "there" > (where there is), while having every step of the way between being a runnable > stable (within reason) system. This greatly limits how things are done. > The current SMP work is not just "workarounds" but rather steps needed > to get from A to B. Sometimes you can't see what the final picture is > by looking at an intermediate step in isolation. > > > > > The only thing holding FreeBSD back is the Multithreading issue. > > I wish you would explain this statement. It could be interpretted in so > many ways that it really is almost meaningless. (Some of the interpretatiosn > however are not..) > > > > > Please clarify this. > > Sure.. how about you clarify your question first however. > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > freebsd-smp@freebsd.org mailing list > > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-smp > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-smp-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > > > > From owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Sep 23 22:25:09 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 21C2616A4CE for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 22:25:09 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.save-ferris.com (ip-69-33-104-67.nyc.megapath.net [69.33.104.67]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A09443D1F for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 22:25:08 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jromero@save-ferris.com) Received: by mail.save-ferris.com (Postfix, from userid 1002) id 5DE7E17066; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 18:24:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from 192.168.100.2 (unknown [192.168.100.3]) by mail.save-ferris.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AE1C17064 for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 18:24:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from 192.168.100.119 (SquirrelMail authenticated user jromero); by new.host.name with HTTP; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 18:24:49 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4499.192.168.100.119.1095978289.squirrel@192.168.100.119> Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 18:24:49 -0400 (EDT) From: jromero@save-ferris.com To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.3a X-Mailer: SquirrelMail/1.4.3a MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Importance: Normal X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.64 (2004-01-11) on ws1.save-ferris.com X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.3 required=3.0 tests=NO_REAL_NAME autolearn=no version=2.64 X-Spam-Level: Subject: SMP quad xeon question X-BeenThere: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD SMP implementation group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 22:25:09 -0000 Need to configure groupware server and multiprotocol wireless proxy for aproximatly 2500 accounts. Application is heavily multi threaded and will require alot of CPU power. The OS will be FreeBSD 5.x Thinking of going with ServerWorks* Grand Champion HE quad xeon server board. Has anyone had any SMP experience with quad xeon systems on freebsd 5.x??? I'm curious to know if anyone experienced any major technical stumbling blocks. I guess I also want to know how well Freebsd 5.x will scale on a 4 proc. system. I'm not on this list so please CC me. Thanks, -JR From owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Sep 24 06:56:13 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56EC216A4CE for ; Fri, 24 Sep 2004 06:56:13 +0000 (GMT) Received: from horus.euredit.net (horus.euredit.net [194.145.144.1]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1FDCA43D31 for ; Fri, 24 Sep 2004 06:56:13 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kde@europages.com) Received: from gandalf.euredit.net (gandalf [194.145.144.88]) by horus.euredit.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17D332028C for ; Fri, 24 Sep 2004 08:56:12 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [10.10.11.141] (unknown [10.10.11.141]) by gandalf.euredit.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8326EAEE2 for ; Fri, 24 Sep 2004 08:56:12 +0200 (CEST) From: Key Dof To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1096008971.61028.14.camel@ramses> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6 Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 08:56:11 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: smbfs and SMP on 5.2.1 X-BeenThere: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD SMP implementation group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 06:56:13 -0000 Hi, I am using 5.2.1-p10 with a HTT P4 cpu, when i try to mount smbfs i get that the module was not compiled with SMP support (in /var/log/messages) I put SMP=yes and SMP_SUPPORT=yes in my make.conf and i recompiled smbfs and mount_smbfs but it didn't change anything. Any idea how to solve this? Thanks From owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Sep 24 07:06:26 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E22B416A4CE for ; Fri, 24 Sep 2004 07:06:26 +0000 (GMT) Received: from obsecurity.dyndns.org (CPE0050040655c8-CM00111ae02aac.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com [69.194.102.143]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0C7243D5E for ; Fri, 24 Sep 2004 07:06:26 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kris@obsecurity.org) Received: by obsecurity.dyndns.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B9023514AE; Fri, 24 Sep 2004 00:06:42 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 00:06:42 -0700 From: Kris Kennaway To: Key Dof Message-ID: <20040924070642.GA75732@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <1096008971.61028.14.camel@ramses> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="J/dobhs11T7y2rNN" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1096008971.61028.14.camel@ramses> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i cc: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: smbfs and SMP on 5.2.1 X-BeenThere: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD SMP implementation group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 07:06:27 -0000 --J/dobhs11T7y2rNN Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 08:56:11AM +0200, Key Dof wrote: > Hi, > I am using 5.2.1-p10 with a HTT P4 cpu, when i try to mount smbfs i > get that the module was not compiled with SMP support (in > /var/log/messages) > I put SMP=yes and SMP_SUPPORT=yes in my make.conf and i recompiled smbfs > and mount_smbfs but it didn't change anything. > Any idea how to solve this? Compile it into your kernel instead of using the module? Kris --J/dobhs11T7y2rNN Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFBU8eCWry0BWjoQKURArxLAJ9LS3+Q92cxtuvfVoc3qK8eW9NB2ACg7G3Y IEYoemUFqr5VpaagZy0W9Ok= =KMqg -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --J/dobhs11T7y2rNN-- From owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Sep 24 07:08:39 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B16D616A4FF for ; Fri, 24 Sep 2004 07:08:38 +0000 (GMT) Received: from horus.euredit.net (horus.euredit.net [194.145.144.1]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AD0443D1D for ; Fri, 24 Sep 2004 07:08:38 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kde@europages.com) Received: from gandalf.euredit.net (gandalf [194.145.144.88]) by horus.euredit.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9BBC1FF8D; Fri, 24 Sep 2004 09:08:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [10.10.11.141] (unknown [10.10.11.141]) by gandalf.euredit.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A555CAFB8; Fri, 24 Sep 2004 09:08:37 +0200 (CEST) From: Key Dof To: Kris Kennaway In-Reply-To: <20040924070642.GA75732@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <1096008971.61028.14.camel@ramses> <20040924070642.GA75732@xor.obsecurity.org> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1096009716.61028.16.camel@ramses> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6 Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 09:08:37 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: smbfs and SMP on 5.2.1 X-BeenThere: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD SMP implementation group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 07:08:39 -0000 I can't find the option neither in NOTES nor in LINT, is it docummented? On Fri, 2004-09-24 at 09:06, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 08:56:11AM +0200, Key Dof wrote: > > Hi, > > I am using 5.2.1-p10 with a HTT P4 cpu, when i try to mount smbfs i > > get that the module was not compiled with SMP support (in > > /var/log/messages) > > I put SMP=yes and SMP_SUPPORT=yes in my make.conf and i recompiled smbfs > > and mount_smbfs but it didn't change anything. > > Any idea how to solve this? > > Compile it into your kernel instead of using the module? > > Kris From owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Sep 24 08:12:59 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 303AB16A4CE for ; Fri, 24 Sep 2004 08:12:59 +0000 (GMT) Received: from horus.euredit.net (horus.euredit.net [194.145.144.1]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C456643D31 for ; Fri, 24 Sep 2004 08:12:58 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kde@europages.com) Received: from gandalf.euredit.net (gandalf [194.145.144.88]) by horus.euredit.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E31211FF0E; Fri, 24 Sep 2004 10:12:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [10.10.11.141] (unknown [10.10.11.141]) by gandalf.euredit.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C456EAECB; Fri, 24 Sep 2004 10:12:57 +0200 (CEST) From: Key Dof To: Kris Kennaway In-Reply-To: <20040924070642.GA75732@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <1096008971.61028.14.camel@ramses> <20040924070642.GA75732@xor.obsecurity.org> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1096013576.61028.22.camel@ramses> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6 Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 10:12:57 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: smbfs and SMP on 5.2.1 X-BeenThere: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD SMP implementation group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 08:12:59 -0000 Searching the net and with trial and error to add options like LIBxxx, i added these lines : options NETSMB options NETSMBCRYPTO options SMBFS options LIBMCHAIN options LIBICONV now it compiles, but still the same error. thanks for any help On Fri, 2004-09-24 at 09:06, Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 08:56:11AM +0200, Key Dof wrote: > > Hi, > > I am using 5.2.1-p10 with a HTT P4 cpu, when i try to mount smbfs i > > get that the module was not compiled with SMP support (in > > /var/log/messages) > > I put SMP=yes and SMP_SUPPORT=yes in my make.conf and i recompiled smbfs > > and mount_smbfs but it didn't change anything. > > Any idea how to solve this? > > Compile it into your kernel instead of using the module? > > Kris From owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Sep 25 14:48:18 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1169116A4CE for ; Sat, 25 Sep 2004 14:48:18 +0000 (GMT) Received: from cs.columbia.edu (cs.columbia.edu [128.59.16.20]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B544843D49 for ; Sat, 25 Sep 2004 14:48:17 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from mre2007@cs.columbia.edu) Received: from hydra.cs.columbia.edu (IDENT:lv9bg2M0FAfnSyqUDMN1qmyxoeS0rtBu@hydra.cs.columbia.edu [128.59.16.129]) by cs.columbia.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i8PEmBwG007889 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NOT) for ; Sat, 25 Sep 2004 10:48:12 -0400 (EDT) Received: from webmail.cs.columbia.edu (IDENT:2Z2W/cxENvHSJO89Uo6A9tYm4SeyBJC1@localhost [127.0.0.1]) i8PEmBAr026414 for ; Sat, 25 Sep 2004 10:48:11 -0400 Received: from 24.243.189.238 (SquirrelMail authenticated user mre2007) by webmail.cs.columbia.edu with HTTP; Sat, 25 Sep 2004 10:48:11 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <1103.24.243.189.238.1096123691.squirrel@webmail.cs.columbia.edu> Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 10:48:11 -0400 (EDT) From: mre2007@cs.columbia.edu To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 Importance: Normal X-PMX-Version: 4.7.0.111621, Antispam-Engine: 2.0.1.0, Antispam-Data: 2004.9.25.0 X-PerlMx-Spam: Gauge=X, Probability=10%, Report='PRIORITY_NO_NAME 0.716, NO_REAL_NAME 0, __CT 0, __CTE 0, __CT_TEXT_PLAIN 0, __HAS_MSGID 0, __HAS_X_PRIORITY 0, __MIME_VERSION 0, __SANE_MSGID 0' Subject: "Kernel Hacking"/Developing on a HT CPU versus "physical" CPUs X-BeenThere: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: FreeBSD SMP implementation group List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 14:48:18 -0000 Hey, I was wondering if from a developing/"kernel hacking" standpoint, are hyperthreading and two "physical" CPUs any different? At what point do the differences have to be taken into consideration when working on the FreeBSD kernel/scheduler/etc? I'm looking to start contributing to the FreeBSD project and am trying to get some hardware set aside. Thanks! -Marc