From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 22 02:00:50 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0AE916A437 for ; Mon, 22 May 2006 02:00:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from needacoder@gmail.com) Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com (nf-out-0910.google.com [64.233.182.185]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 49E0C43D45 for ; Mon, 22 May 2006 02:00:50 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from needacoder@gmail.com) Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id x29so469758nfb for ; Sun, 21 May 2006 19:00:49 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=mgb/gZi5bOYaOHvfmU0xqzmUhnQmz8i+jMbYEfZ4koY8EXQQYBgOzIz2kd7U0kyFvHwSk5jVxosgH4z4YHj7sCttqoZq0pcAPbnW4tzfBsiu/BCwnjrbwKGff347inRXSHP5D1OkdobM4lNUPmHxQ5GdYMDmjZT2bDRHHZAPbwY= Received: by 10.49.61.19 with SMTP id o19mr3351061nfk; Sun, 21 May 2006 18:54:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.49.75.2 with HTTP; Sun, 21 May 2006 18:54:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <1e4841eb0605211854i44c4aa4cm9dfc72506c2232ea@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 21 May 2006 21:54:19 -0400 From: "m m" To: kmacy@fsmware.com, current@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 22 May 2006 03:01:02 +0000 Cc: Subject: Re: FreeBSD is now self-hosting on the UltraSPARC T1 X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 02:00:51 -0000 On 5/21/06, Kip Macy wrote: > I can't find the original e-mail, but someone was suggesting I post a > dmesg to link to. > > http://www.fsmware.com/sun4v/dmesg_latest.txt ... FreeBSD/SMP: Multiprocessor System Detected: 32 CPUs ... SMP: AP CPU #31 Launched! SMP: AP CPU #30 Launched! SMP: AP CPU #29 Launched! SMP: AP CPU #28 Launched! ... Some phylosophical questions - is this machine really an SMP? Can we have an "SMP" when there's only one chip? (it's CMT/CMP, isn't it?) Can we perhaps stop calling any MP an "SMP" one of these days? While on topic, the Opterons aren't SMP either, and neither are the ht-Xeons... but we somehow keep lumping them into the "SMP" category. Maybe we should fix this once and for all? Won't it be weird to write page-allocation code for NUMA machines and put the code into an SMP directory? What about coloring algorithms on the T1000 to improve locality in it's funky cache hierarchy, are we going to put that under "SMP" category too? Who was it that decided that all the world that has more than core is an SMP? (please pardon the format of this mail - but I really only have questions, no answers...)