From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jan 14 03:15:40 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C585516A4CE for ; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 03:15:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from alpha.workingtechnology.co.uk (www.shavers.co.uk [81.109.162.167]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5270543D3F for ; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 03:15:36 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from andrew@shavers.co.uk) Received: from laptop (host213-123-251-200.in-addr.btopenworld.com [213.123.251.200]) by alpha.workingtechnology.co.uk (Postfix) with SMTP id 01A442ABA06 for ; Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:14:44 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <003c01c3da8f$c022a3e0$0b00a8c0@laptop> From: "Andrew Edwards (Olympic Shaver Centre)" To: Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:15:42 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 05:28:04 -0800 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.1 Subject: Hyperthreading with SMP in 5.2 X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 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: Wed, 14 Jan 2004 11:15:40 -0000 Hi, Could anyone clarify the level of support for Pentium 4 hyperthreading = in 5.2? I understand that the kernel is now smp aware by default but = does it handle the logical cpu's of hyperthreading in the same manner as = it would a physical cpu? I ask as for the best part my machine rarely goes above 50% cpu = utilisation. However using -j2 when building the kernel or world for = example will give me nearer full use, which I can appreciate as it = generates concurrent processes that likely get divided over the two = logical cpu. Not being fully aware of the technical bits to hyperthreading is the = above scenario as good as it can be and is making good use of the cpu, = i.e if I run a single cpu heavy process, whereas without hyperthreading = I would see 100% usage now I only see around 50%. Thanks.