From owner-freebsd-questions Thu Apr 13 8:56:57 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from radius.wavefire.com (radius.wavefire.com [139.142.95.252]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E1E1F37B842 for ; Thu, 13 Apr 2000 08:56:38 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from swen@wavefire.com) Received: (qmail 10882 invoked from network); 13 Apr 2000 15:56:35 -0000 Received: from swen.wavefire.com (139.142.167.220) by radius.wavefire.com with SMTP; 13 Apr 2000 15:56:35 -0000 Message-Id: <4.3.2.20000413085316.0303e900@mail.wavefire.com> X-Sender: swen@mail.wavefire.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 4.3 Date: Thu, 13 Apr 2000 08:55:24 -0700 To: John Reynolds~ , questions@freebsd.org From: Chameleon Subject: Re: SMP with dual-boot (win98) question In-Reply-To: <14580.51371.762330.305509@hip186.ch.intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG I have an ASUS P2B-D, and as far as 2 processors goes, win98 ignores the other one... I assume it will be the same for the P2B-DS Though i admit i have yet to put a real OS on it... :) maybe sometime soon... Swen At 12:04 PM 4/12/00 -0700, John Reynolds~ wrote: >Hello all, > >I searched the archives to try and answer this, but came up dry. I've got an >ASUS P2B-DS motherboard with 1 processor in there now. I'm currently in the >process of purchasing a second processor so that I can experiment with the >SMP features of 4.0 (not that 3.x didn't have SMP ... I am just on 4.0 now ;). > >However, I've got to keep Win98 around on another disk for the wife so she >can boot into it for certain apps. The question I have is: does anybody >currently have this configuration, i.e. two processors with SMP kernel but >dual boot into win98? Will win98 happily "ignore" the second processor and run >"normally," or will having the second one there confuse it? > >I've never messed with SMP machines before but I assume that during the boot >process the kernel running on CPU0 has to initiate the second CPU to start >running. So, my theory is that win98 will happily ignore the second CPU >sitting there. True? > >Thanks, > >-Jr > >-- >=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= >| John Reynolds WCCG, CCE, Higher Levels of Abstraction | >| Intel Corporation MS: CH6-210 Phone: 480-554-9092 pgr: 602-868-6512 | >| jreynold@sedona.ch.intel.com http://www-aec.ch.intel.com/~jreynold/ | >=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= > > >To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org >with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message Your mouse has moved. Windows NT must be restarted for the change to take effect. Reboot now? [ OK ] To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message