From owner-freebsd-questions  Tue Nov  6 14:19: 0 2001
Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Received: from mail.XtremeDev.com (xtremedev.com [216.241.38.65])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1272437B41A
	for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>; Tue,  6 Nov 2001 14:18:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from xtremedev.com (xtremedev.com [216.241.38.65])
	by mail.XtremeDev.com (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 325C470607; Tue,  6 Nov 2001 15:18:54 -0700 (MST)
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2001 15:18:54 -0700 (MST)
From: FreeBSD user <freebsd@XtremeDev.com>
To: Anthony Atkielski <anthony@atkielski.com>
Cc: Mark Hughes <mh_lists@digitalspy.co.uk>,
	FreeBSD Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: Multi-processor Support
In-Reply-To: <001f01c166ad$5ac379a0$0a00000a@atkielski.com>
Message-ID: <20011106151603.Y9464-100000@Amber.XtremeDev.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <freebsd-questions.FreeBSD.ORG>
List-Archive: <http://docs.freebsd.org/mail/> (Web Archive)
List-Help: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=help> (List Instructions)
List-Subscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=subscribe%20freebsd-questions>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:majordomo@FreeBSD.ORG?subject=unsubscribe%20freebsd-questions>
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

On Tue, 6 Nov 2001, Anthony Atkielski wrote:

> Mark writes:
>
> > Think of it this way - most systems in use with
> > FreeBSD right now, I would imagine, have only one
> > processor, so does it make sense to clutter the
> > generic kernel with code that most systems won't
> > use? With a source-provided OS, there's no need
> > to do that.
>
> Recompiling the OS to make configuration changes is rather dated for most
> systems.  The problem with rebuilding the OS is that, if you make any mistakes,
> you may not be able to boot the system at all, and this risk is generally enough
> to outweigh any insignificant savings in run-time resource consumption incurred
> by excluding a few snippets of code.  This is why so much is done with
> configuration files and runtime parameters these days.  Individual application
> systems are rarely rebuilt to make configuration changes for the same reasons.
>

True. IF SMP support can be done as a runtime option. Which is what you
are assuming it is. If it indeed can be made as a runtime option, I
suspect it will take a great many man hours. But until then, it'll
probably remain a compile time option.

>
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
>
>
>


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message