From owner-freebsd-smp Fri Apr 28 20: 2:43 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from thehousleys.net (frenchknot.ne.mediaone.net [24.147.224.201]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E24437B9AE for ; Fri, 28 Apr 2000 20:02:39 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jim@thehousleys.net) Received: from thehousleys.net (baby.int.thehousleys.net [192.168.0.24]) by thehousleys.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA06707; Fri, 28 Apr 2000 23:01:52 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <390A50A0.554B1D1A@thehousleys.net> Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2000 23:01:52 -0400 From: James Housley Organization: The Housleys dot Net X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (X11; U; FreeBSD 3.4-STABLE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Matthew Dillon Cc: Terry Lambert , Jeremiah Gowdy , Steve Passe , freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: hlt instructions and temperature issues References: <200004282108.OAA01313@usr08.primenet.com> <200004282240.PAA14200@apollo.backplane.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Matthew Dillon wrote: > > > For example, if we can remove *ALL* memory writes from the best-case > idle loop it should make a huge difference in heat dissipation without > having to resort to HLT! Right now we make a number of subroutine > calls (such as to procrunnable()) which will result in external > bus cycles. If those can be inlined it should have a noticeable effect. > I haven't looked the the Pentuim instruction set in a long while, but is there low-power mode that could be used instead of hlt? Slow down, but not sleep the CPU until it is needed? Jim -- "Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines" -- Anon To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message