From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat May 24 10:38:37 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C912BA31; Sat, 24 May 2014 10:38:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from carrick.bishnet.net (carrick-mx.bishnet.net [IPv6:2a01:348:132:51::14]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "carrick.bishnet.net", Issuer "Bishnet Certificate Authority" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8BC0F2FD0; Sat, 24 May 2014 10:38:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from carrick-users.bishnet.net ([192.168.51.10]) by carrick.bishnet.net with esmtps (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.80.1 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1Wo9LX-000PxC-L1; Sat, 24 May 2014 11:38:35 +0100 Received: (from tdb@localhost) by carrick-users.bishnet.net (8.14.7/8.14.7/Submit) id s4OAcZiq099769; Sat, 24 May 2014 11:38:35 +0100 (BST) (envelope-from tdb) Date: Sat, 24 May 2014 11:38:35 +0100 From: Tim Bishop To: Alan Somers Subject: Re: Processor cores not properly detected/activated? Message-ID: <20140524103835.GI13462@carrick-users.bishnet.net> References: <20140524014713.GF13462@carrick-users.bishnet.net> <20140524024231.GG13462@carrick-users.bishnet.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-PGP-Key: 0x6C226B37FDF38D55, http://www.bishnet.net/tim/tim-bishnet-net.asc X-PGP-Fingerprint: 4BD9 5F90 8A50 40E8 D26C D681 6C22 6B37 FDF3 8D55 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Cc: FreeBSD CURRENT 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 10:38:37 -0000 On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 09:03:12PM -0600, Alan Somers wrote: > 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. I submitted a PR to that effect: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=190169 Thanks again for your help. Tim. -- Tim Bishop http://www.bishnet.net/tim/ PGP Key: 0x6C226B37FDF38D55