From owner-cvs-all Thu Jan 23 7:40: 0 2003 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E6A537B405 for ; Thu, 23 Jan 2003 07:39:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.speakeasy.net (mail17.speakeasy.net [216.254.0.217]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FD6843E4A for ; Thu, 23 Jan 2003 07:39:56 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Received: (qmail 25370 invoked from network); 23 Jan 2003 15:39:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO server.baldwin.cx) ([216.27.160.63]) (envelope-sender ) by mail17.speakeasy.net (qmail-ldap-1.03) with DES-CBC3-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 23 Jan 2003 15:39:58 -0000 Received: from laptop.baldwin.cx (gw1.twc.weather.com [216.133.140.1]) by server.baldwin.cx (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h0NFdsUT041490; Thu, 23 Jan 2003 10:39:54 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.5.2 on FreeBSD X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20030123085352.GS18342@survey.codeburst.net> Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 10:39:57 -0500 (EST) From: John Baldwin To: Paul Richards Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/i386/i386 identcpu.c initcpu.c locore.s Cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On 23-Jan-2003 Paul Richards wrote: > On Wed, Jan 22, 2003 at 12:14:53PM -0800, John Baldwin wrote: >> jhb 2003/01/22 12:14:53 PST >> >> Modified files: (Branch: RELENG_4) >> sys/i386/i386 identcpu.c initcpu.c locore.s machdep.c >> mp_machdep.c >> sys/i386/include asnames.h md_var.h >> Log: >> MFC: Precursors to simple hyperthreading support and sync with current: > > Is it a good idea to do this in 4? The simple HT support is a very small patch (see http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/patches/htt.patch) and is something that several people/companies that use 4.x need. > We should stop moving new features into 4 for 2 reasons, a) I've always > been against feature development of -stable, but b) we need to encourage > take-up of our latest branch and the less "modern" 4 is the more likely > people will be to migrate around 5.2. The SMP work won't be such a huge > draw since so few people have SMP machines. Most if not all of the new P4's coming out do have HT support nowadays. Also, I don't know about you, but where I work we aren't going to be using 5.x in production until it gets a lot better. Both SMPng and KSE (and other things like new schedulers) are very ambitious projects that take a while to get done. There is no magic waving of arms that is going to solve those problems in the next 3 months. -- John Baldwin <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message