From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat May 24 03:03:14 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C562A5BA; Sat, 24 May 2014 03:03:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wg0-x234.google.com (mail-wg0-x234.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::234]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3D0ED208D; Sat, 24 May 2014 03:03:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wg0-f52.google.com with SMTP id l18so5509213wgh.11 for ; Fri, 23 May 2014 20:03:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=74+oHAxROpr5bRDuuo2I0XP7qPYByKx/J44Dnuy6zSY=; b=Y7rIJcYnPh2MPaPLvPxfD6lIz7HxmO69hF79Fkwv34rTmzSbJGxGTOEa9j8p9CL9s0 zZmlU6yNAQNpRYStSzkxBWuzyJJPKiB3mPlHH5IMslBWo6Ml15pCcIeqWt5o0zMxLjX3 MsDTkiN8nRX9A4w65XBtIB+Aj+foLT/w300tQPicyqCjXNrMmv7g4R+rkRWIp0qnLmEL QKTAL24pe7y1b296a8h1uNsRLsYqVVKAp89M8WJE/oDroGcqucNDkFdZXV55Hm9LpRVG 0+i+nkUkyfIVZ+yZr9Q6SvQRVjndU7kaTe+8xs/l5s+Ci24e1SZ7sOhv2Y52RhkrJaRI yYMQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.14.72 with SMTP id n8mr7207111wic.53.1400900592599; Fri, 23 May 2014 20:03:12 -0700 (PDT) Sender: asomers@gmail.com Received: by 10.194.168.130 with HTTP; Fri, 23 May 2014 20:03:12 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20140524024231.GG13462@carrick-users.bishnet.net> References: <20140524014713.GF13462@carrick-users.bishnet.net> <20140524024231.GG13462@carrick-users.bishnet.net> Date: Fri, 23 May 2014 21:03:12 -0600 X-Google-Sender-Auth: -30OJqK3sMT12ZqD3i9clDCnKxc Message-ID: Subject: Re: Processor cores not properly detected/activated? From: Alan Somers To: Tim Bishop Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: FreeBSD CURRENT , Alan Somers X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 24 May 2014 03:03:14 -0000 On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 8:42 PM, Tim Bishop wrote: > On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 08:07:03PM -0600, Alan Somers wrote: >> On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 7:47 PM, Tim Bishop wrote: >> > I have a new quad CPU system containing four of these processors: >> > >> > Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E7-4830 v2 @ 2.20GHz (2200.05-MHz K8-class CPU) >> > >> > I've tried FreeBSD 10.0, stable/10 and head, but all of them only detect >> > a maximum of 64 "CPUs". There should be 80. Here's the relevant dmesg >> > output (full output attached): >> > >> > FreeBSD/SMP: Multiprocessor System Detected: 64 CPUs >> > FreeBSD/SMP: 3 package(s) x 10 core(s) x 2 SMT threads >> > ... >> >> Try setting MAXCPU higher. It's defined by default to 64 in, >> sys/amd64/include/param.h > > Ah! Thank you, yes, that fixed it: > > FreeBSD/SMP: Multiprocessor System Detected: 80 CPUs > FreeBSD/SMP: 4 package(s) x 10 core(s) x 2 SMT threads > > Given the number of "CPUs" in some top end processors (up to 30 per > socket), a limit of 64 is starting to seem low. Is it worth doubling it > to 128? Or even higher? Yeah, I think so. It seems like a GENERIC kernel ought to be able to handle the biggest commonly available quad socket systems. Anything with more than 4 sockets, though, is probably too exotic to deserve such special treatment. > > It'd be nice to be able to use a stock kernel with freebsd-update at > least. > > Anyway, thanks for your help Alan, at least my system is working fully > now :-) > > Tim. > > -- > Tim Bishop > http://www.bishnet.net/tim/ > PGP Key: 0x6C226B37FDF38D55 >