Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 21:27:08 -0700 From: "Evan Dower" <evantd@hotmail.com> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: RE: smp in 5.1 Message-ID: <BAY8-F6ew8k69RKLpgT00013f08@hotmail.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I've got a dual athlon 1900+ MP. I've run both 4.x and 5.x. On 5.x I've tried both schedulers (4BSD and ULE). I don't think I've ever had any crashes, except when I install nvidia-driver, and then it crashes all the time. Theoretically 5.x should be better for smp as much work has happened in terms of locking. I haven't done any benchmarks, but I wouldn't expect any dramatic improvement, as locking work in many subsystems is still incomplete. Many things still need GIANT. 5.x does have a bunch of other good stuff though, and going that route saves you from upgrading later through an even bigger version gap. That's my two sense, and if it sounds like I know what I'm talking about, it's pure coincidence ;-) Others: please correct me if I got anything really wrong (I tried to be vague enough to aviod that, but we'll see). ;-) Evan Dower >From: Andre Guibert de Bruet <andy@siliconlandmark.com> >To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org >Subject: RE: smp in 5.1 >Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 22:40:21 -0400 (EDT) > > >I guess I'll chime in as well... I have a Dual Athlon 2000+ MP here and >it's running like a charm with SCHED_4BSD. > >Andy > > > Andre Guibert de Bruet | Enterprise Software Consultant > > > Silicon Landmark, LLC. | http://siliconlandmark.com/ > > >On Mon, 11 Aug 2003, derwood wrote: > > > I've been running 5.1-Current since its release on a Dell Precision 410 >with > > dual P-III 500's > > No SMP problems here at all.. Its been extremely stable for me thus far. > > > > Darin - > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org > > [mailto:owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org] On Behalf Of Steve Kargl > > Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 7:10 PM > > To: Andy Farkas > > Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org; Eriq Lamar > > Subject: Re: smp in 5.1 > > > > > > On Tue, Aug 12, 2003 at 08:25:38AM +1000, Andy Farkas wrote: > > > On Mon, 11 Aug 2003, Eriq Lamar wrote: > > > > > > > Is there any advantage in 5.1 over 4.8 for two amd mp's. and if so > > > > could someone tell what they are. I am interested in building dual > > > > system using mp's but not sure which version would be better. > > > > > > Scheduling in 5.1 is broken (sched_ule doesn't even work*). > > > > > > Stick with 4.8. > > > > > > * for me, sched_ule completely locks up my box, no ping, no keybd. > > > Exact same kernel with sched_4bsd works fine. > > > > > > > Strange. ULE has worked fine on my UP system for > > several months and the SMP system I recently obtained > > from a co-worker hasn't panicked while running ULE. > > Can you drop into ddb and trace the problem with > > ULE on your system? > > > > -- > > Steve > > _______________________________________________ > > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to >"freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > > > _______________________________________________ > > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to >"freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > >_______________________________________________ >freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list >http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current >To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" _________________________________________________________________ Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?BAY8-F6ew8k69RKLpgT00013f08>