Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 18:11:03 -0700 From: Nate Lawson <nate@root.org> To: Jung-uk Kim <jkim@FreeBSD.org> Cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org, Brooks Davis <brooks@one-eyed-alien.net>, cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, Eric Anholt <eta@lclark.edu>, David O'Brien <obrien@FreeBSD.org>, Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/amd64/amd64 identcpu.c src/sys/i386/i386 identcpu.c Message-ID: <43544BA7.6050906@root.org> In-Reply-To: <200510171850.39961.jkim@FreeBSD.org> References: <200510160858.j9G8wR9v045670@repoman.freebsd.org> <20051017213635.GC59364@cell.sick.ru> <20051017220004.GI15097@odin.ac.hmc.edu> <200510171850.39961.jkim@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Jung-uk Kim wrote: > On Monday 17 October 2005 06:00 pm, Brooks Davis wrote: >>I'm not sure that I care what dmesg says, but I do want an accurate >>view of our topology presented by the system, not some arbitrary >>and frankly meaningless CPU count. If nothing else I care because >>the two cores share one memory controller. That may not be all >>that noticable now for normal application, but I expect it will be >>once we start seeing 4+ core CPUs. Telling the user the (somewhat >>complicated) truth about their hardware is part of "doing it >>right". > > > I believe we have to implement ACPI SRAT (Static Resource Affinity > Table) and SLIT (System Locality Information Table) to achieve this. > Linux already does this for i386, amd64, and i64: > > http://lxr.linux.no/source/arch/i386/kernel/srat.c > http://lxr.linux.no/source/arch/x86_64/mm/srat.c > http://lxr.linux.no/source/arch/ia64/kernel/acpi.c I'm happy to review any patches to implement this. -- Nate
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?43544BA7.6050906>