Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2015 10:07:44 +0100 From: Gary Jennejohn <gljennjohn@gmail.com> To: Ivan Klymenko <fidaj@ukr.net> Cc: Harrison Grundy <harrison.grundy@astrodoggroup.com>, Alfred Perlstein <alfred@freebsd.org>, Slawa Olhovchenkov <slw@zxy.spb.ru>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RFC: Simplfying hyperthreading distinctions Message-ID: <20150322100744.5b390591@ernst.home> In-Reply-To: <20150321214336.334eaea5@nonamehost.local> References: <1640664.8z9mx3EOQs@ralph.baldwin.cx> <54FA1180.3080605@astrodoggroup.com> <1526311.uylCbgv5VB@ralph.baldwin.cx> <20150320123823.GA49621@zxy.spb.ru> <550DC564.5020802@freebsd.org> <20150321214336.334eaea5@nonamehost.local>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 21 Mar 2015 21:43:35 +0200 Ivan Klymenko <fidaj@ukr.net> wrote: > __ Sat, 21 Mar 2015 12:24:20 -0700 > Alfred Perlstein <alfred@freebsd.org> __________: > > > John, > > > > Just a quick note on this, hopefully it's not too off-topic... > > > > We need to detect if HTT or SMT is enabled, right now there are no > > sysctl nodes to detect this and instead we have to parse xml out of > > the scheduler... > > > > Does it make sense to have a basic sysctl tree for this? > > > > hw.cpu.threading.smt=0 > > hw.cpu.threading.htt=0 > > > > or something? > > > > I am sorry that I interfere > Why then not use kern.smp.topology for this purpose? > Because it's only present in the ULE scheduler, BSD doesn't have it. -- Gary Jennejohn
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20150322100744.5b390591>