From owner-freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG Sun May 11 13:30:11 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@hub.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C321E37B404 for ; Sun, 11 May 2003 13:30:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.freebsd.org [216.136.204.21]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 636F343FBF for ; Sun, 11 May 2003 13:30:11 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats@FreeBSD.org) Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (gnats@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h4BKUBUp089761 for ; Sun, 11 May 2003 13:30:11 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from gnats@freefall.freebsd.org) Received: (from gnats@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h4BKUB21089759; Sun, 11 May 2003 13:30:11 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 11 May 2003 13:30:11 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200305112030.h4BKUB21089759@freefall.freebsd.org> To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org From: Murray Stokely Subject: Re: kern/47937: hw.ncpu and kern.smp.cpus duplicate same info X-BeenThere: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: Murray Stokely List-Id: Bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 11 May 2003 20:30:12 -0000 The following reply was made to PR kern/47937; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Murray Stokely To: Arun Sharma Cc: FreeBSD-gnats-submit@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: kern/47937: hw.ncpu and kern.smp.cpus duplicate same info Date: Sun, 11 May 2003 13:21:39 -0700 On Tue, Feb 04, 2003 at 11:17:47PM -0800, Arun Sharma wrote: > hw.ncpu and kern.smp.cpus duplicate same info > > >How-To-Repeat: > # sysctl hw.ncpu > # sysctl kern.smp.cpus > > One of them (kern.smp.cpus ?) should be eliminated before > too many people start using it. The bigger problem is that the sysctl's aren't documented very well. Can you come up with a patch to help document these better? Either in sysctl(8), or tuning(7), or anywhere else? kern.smp.* only shows up on SMP aware kernels, so I don't really see this as that big of a problem. If you're interested, please work with Tom Rhodes and the doc team on finding the best place to document these different sysctl tunables. Personally, I think this PR should be closed, but I'd appreciate any help you could give us on the larger sysctl documentation problem. - Murray