From owner-cvs-all Thu Jan 23 10:16:50 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 6BB9937B401; Thu, 23 Jan 2003 10:16:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from baraca.united.net.ua (ns.united.net.ua [193.111.8.193]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF58B43ED8; Thu, 23 Jan 2003 10:16:47 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sobomax@portaone.com) Received: from vega.vega.com (root@xDSL-2-2.united.net.ua [193.111.9.226]) by baraca.united.net.ua (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id h0NIGNWd087364; Thu, 23 Jan 2003 20:16:24 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from sobomax@portaone.com) Received: from portaone.com (big_brother.vega.com [192.168.1.1]) by vega.vega.com (8.12.6/8.12.5) with ESMTP id h0NIGcUk052171; Thu, 23 Jan 2003 20:16:38 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from sobomax@portaone.com) Message-ID: <3E303186.D291E716@portaone.com> Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2003 20:16:38 +0200 From: Maxim Sobolev Organization: Porta Software Ltd X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.8 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en,uk,ru MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Paul Richards Cc: John Baldwin , cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/i386/i386 identcpu.c initcpu.c locore.s machdep.c mp_machdep.c src/sys/i386/include asnames.h md_var.h References: <200301222014.h0MKEr8k018331@repoman.freebsd.org> <20030123085352.GS18342@survey.codeburst.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit 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 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? > > 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. I disagree in this particular case. Since HT processors are already available on the market, their support is crucial for users that need more raw CPU power today, not three or four months from now, when 5.x stabilizes enough to be useable in a production environment. -Maxim To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message