From owner-freebsd-smp Fri Aug 20 15:10:38 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from hercules.cs.ucsb.edu (hercules.cs.ucsb.edu [128.111.41.30]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 31AE714D8D for ; Fri, 20 Aug 1999 15:10:33 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from blanquer@cs.ucsb.edu) Received: from ella (ella [128.111.49.42]) by hercules.cs.ucsb.edu (8.8.6/8.8.6) with ESMTP id PAA18678; Fri, 20 Aug 1999 15:09:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 20 Aug 1999 15:09:38 -0700 (PDT) From: "Josep Maria M. Blanquer" X-Sender: blanquer@ella To: Luoqi Chen Cc: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: SMP differences between -stable and -current (RE: wine and SMP) Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > A threaded process *can* have multiple threads simultaneously on >multiple CPUs in -current, and I'm getting close on moving interrupt >handling out of GKL, that is, allowing multiple interrupts be serviced >simultaneously. Hmmm, that sounds pretty interesting! Do you have any docs explaining this? I mean the way you are implementing it...The docs I've seen are usually explaining possible strategies and problems, but it's difficult to know the actual status of it. Of course one can always take a look to the kernel code, but it's not easy task, specially because the SMP code it's kinda sparse... With some docs about the actual implementation would be much more easy for others to start playing with things like proc. affinity and many other performance improvements... BTW is that code going to be part of -current? if so, do you know when (aprox)? Nice, that should really make a difference in for example server boxes with a lot of traffic... Josep M. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message