From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 5 20:35:14 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F02FC16A4DD; Tue, 5 Sep 2006 20:35:13 +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 55A9543D49; Tue, 5 Sep 2006 20:35:13 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) Received: from localhost.corp.yahoo.com (john@localhost [127.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by server.baldwin.cx (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k85KZBwO070121; Tue, 5 Sep 2006 16:35:11 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org) From: John Baldwin To: Maxim Sobolev Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2006 16:33:45 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 References: <200609051715.k85HFPtF078969@repoman.freebsd.org> <200609051435.37443.jhb@freebsd.org> <44FDD7E5.1000803@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <44FDD7E5.1000803@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200609051633.46888.jhb@freebsd.org> X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH authentication, not delayed by milter-greylist-2.0.2 (server.baldwin.cx [127.0.0.1]); Tue, 05 Sep 2006 16:35:11 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.88.3/1806/Tue Sep 5 11:00:48 2006 on server.baldwin.cx X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.4 required=4.2 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.1.3 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.3 (2006-06-01) on server.baldwin.cx Cc: cvs-src@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, cvs-all@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/i386/i386 local_apic.c src/sys/amd64/amd64 local_apic.c X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2006 20:35:14 -0000 On Tuesday 05 September 2006 16:02, Maxim Sobolev wrote: > John Baldwin wrote: > >>> (That is, are there any such places. If so, you > >>> just broke them.) > >> No, I believe that I did not, unless you can provide example of the > >> contrary. > > > > linprocfs, but it lies anyway. I've engaged in hacks like this in 4.x, > > That's what I mean - I can't imagine how can you get any useful > statistics out of CPU times by combining it with number of processors. > > > but I think they are just that: hacks. I think a real fix is to support > > turning off CPUs in the MI code and allow userland to query via a non-hackish > > interface how many CPUs are actually enabled and get appropriate load stats, > > etc. based on that. > > Yes, that's would be nice. But in the meantime my goal is to resolve > obvious regression we have in the 6.x release in the presence of the HTT > CPU. It's not a regression I think as 4.x and 5.x both do the same as before this commit (IIRC), but that's ok. -- John Baldwin