From owner-freebsd-smp Sat Mar 2 10:16:13 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from posgate.acis.com.au (posgate.acis.com.au [203.14.230.14]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E69437B400 for ; Sat, 2 Mar 2002 10:16:08 -0800 (PST) Received: from bullseye.apana.org.au (dialup-2.aaa.net.au [203.14.230.67]) by posgate.acis.com.au (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g22IG3u12855; Sun, 3 Mar 2002 05:16:04 +1100 Received: from bullseye.apana.org.au (tenring.andymac.org [203.9.107.238]) by bullseye.apana.org.au (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g22DTdd08227; Sun, 3 Mar 2002 00:29:39 +1100 (EST) (envelope-from andymac@bullseye.apana.org.au) Date: Sat, 2 Mar 2002 23:27:14 +1100 (EDT) From: Andrew MacIntyre To: Nathan Kunkee Cc: Subject: Re: freebsd-hackers SMP performance question In-Reply-To: <20020301162258.GA24102@umr.edu> Message-ID: X-X-Sender: andymac@bullseye.andymac.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Fri, 1 Mar 2002, Nathan Kunkee wrote: > I'm using a dual P120, 64M ram, built my own SMP kernel, and have noticed the > same thing: performance/through put slows to nothing. my best example of this > is when in X I move the mouse. no mouse motion, ~6% cpu usage. move the mouse, > ~40-55% usage. Are all interrupts being mapped to a single cpu?? A dual P120 would definitely be subject to the fix made post 4.5. Search the archives for a thread with the subject "P5 vs. SMP, part 2"; one followup contains a patch for a Pentium specific issue. -- Andrew I MacIntyre "These thoughts are mine alone..." E-mail: andymac@bullseye.apana.org.au | Snail: PO Box 370 andymac@pcug.org.au | Belconnen ACT 2616 Web: http://www.andymac.org/ | Australia To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message