From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Apr 18 16: 4: 4 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from et-gw.etinc.com (et-gw.etinc.com [207.252.1.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E518637B422 for ; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 16:04:00 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dennis@etinc.com) Received: from dbsys.etinc.com (dbsys.etinc.com [207.252.1.18]) by et-gw.etinc.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA08136; Wed, 18 Apr 2001 19:04:14 GMT (envelope-from dennis@etinc.com) Message-Id: <5.0.2.1.0.20010418174822.03b13910@mail.etinc.com> X-Sender: dennis@mail.etinc.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.0.2 Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 18:25:25 -0400 To: Kris Kennaway From: Dennis Subject: Re: SMP in 2.4 (fwd) Cc: Rik van Riel , freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <20010418111523.B35813@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <5.0.2.1.0.20010418131202.03d0a280@mail.etinc.com> <5.0.2.1.0.20010418131202.03d0a280@mail.etinc.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG At 02:15 PM 04/18/2001, Kris Kennaway wrote: >On Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 01:17:03PM -0400, Dennis wrote: > > At 01:12 PM 04/18/2001, Rik van Riel wrote: > > >Hi, > > > > > >better back out SMPng real fast, otherwise you'll get into a > > >flamewar with Dennis again ;) > > > > I just fear that "ng" will have the same negative connotations that > "NT" did. > >Feel free to test it and contribute your bug reports to the >developers. We make -current available for this reason, you know.. > >Kris No thanks. I treasure these tranquil days without endless race conditions, lockups and undebuggable code. I see that the more stressful days approach. I'll stick with single processor and count on my buddies at intel to raise the bar by 75% every year without having to introduce the instability that SMPng will undoubted suffer with for long periods. A 1.5Ghz processor can outperform 2 fully saturated PCI buses, so its not going to help much in the networking world, which is where I live. Processing power is already exceeding the busses capabilities. Its nice to have a processor for user space and one for kernel/interrupt space, but going beyond that to seriously adulterate the OS to squeeze a few extra cycles in a world where processors are jumping 20% in speed every few months seems counterproductive. You dont put 2 engines in a car to make it faster, you get a faster engine. It seems that there is a lack of foresight here...you're losing a year or more of engineering time and before SMPng is stablilized the IA-64 will be out and most multiprocessor applications will be rushing to move over to that. DB To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message