From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 17 16:40:11 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2E2E16A400 for ; Fri, 17 Mar 2006 16:40:10 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from server.baldwin.cx (66-23-211-162.clients.speedfactory.net [66.23.211.162]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2493443D45 for ; Fri, 17 Mar 2006 16:40:10 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from localhost (john@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by server.baldwin.cx (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k2HGe3Iu054949; Fri, 17 Mar 2006 11:40:03 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) From: John Baldwin To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 11:39:05 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 References: <20060317085746.S15860@quartz.bos.dyndns.com> In-Reply-To: <20060317085746.S15860@quartz.bos.dyndns.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200603171139.07121.jhb@freebsd.org> X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.87.1/1335/Wed Mar 15 23:58:43 2006 on server.baldwin.cx X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=4.2 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.1.0 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.0 (2005-09-13) on server.baldwin.cx Cc: Tom Daly Subject: Re: Recommended SMP Config X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Mar 2006 16:40:11 -0000 On Friday 17 March 2006 09:04, Tom Daly wrote: > Hi, > I'm running FreeBSD 6.0 Release (amd64) on Dell Poweredge 2850s. So far, > so good. I'm doing a pretty vanilla install of things, enabling SMP in the > kernel, and that's pretty much it. This server has 2 EM64T CPUs in it. > > When looking at top, CPU 1 rarely shows up with processes on it. systat > does show it idle most of the time. Why is this? Why do processes land on > CPU 0, 2, and 3 in most cases. > > Also, by setting machdep.hyperthreading_allowed=1, CPU 1 starts taking > process onto it. Because CPU 1 is a hyperthread. So is CPU 3 for that matter. -- John Baldwin <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve" = http://www.FreeBSD.org