Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2003 18:00:22 -0800 From: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com> To: John David Duncan <jdd@greatschools.net> Cc: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/i386/i386 mp_machdep.c Message-ID: <3E3F1EB6.CCC1B9BB@mindspring.com> References: <XFMail.20030130114117.jhb@FreeBSD.org> <5.1.0.14.2.20030203101241.00a22b20@willow.he.net> <Pine.OSX.4.52.0302031642530.2280@dh8.office.greatschools.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
John David Duncan wrote: > Now I'm confused, and I'm wondering if anyone could clarify: > > 4.6-release does not have the idle_hlt sysctl. Is it using > the hlt instruction, or not? 4.6 halts in the idle loop, if vm_page_zero_idle() returns zero, in the SMP case, or if do_page_zero_idle (a sysctl that only exists in the SMP case) is zero, always. See all uses of _hlt_vector in /sys/i386/i386/swtch.s for more enlightenement. > And if I install the HTT patch, should I also set idle_hlt=1, or > does it become irrelevant? If the patch you are talking about is the one that spin-loops the CPU core in question, if the other CPU cores in a hyperthreaded CPU are already HLT'ed, then the answer is "no, it's not irrelevent". -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3E3F1EB6.CCC1B9BB>