From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 26 19:56:06 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7FA116A4CE for ; Sat, 26 Mar 2005 19:56:06 +0000 (GMT) Received: from imo-m24.mx.aol.com (imo-m24.mx.aol.com [64.12.137.5]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5063143D5A for ; Sat, 26 Mar 2005 19:56:06 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from EM1897@aol.com) Received: from EM1897@aol.com by imo-m24.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v37_r5.33.) id e.1ad.34678d2c (15874); Sat, 26 Mar 2005 14:55:52 -0500 (EST) Received: from mblk-d34 (mblk-d34.mblk.aol.com [205.188.212.218]) by air-id07.mx.aol.com (v104.18) with ESMTP id MAILINID71-3e024245be48212; Sat, 26 Mar 2005 14:55:52 -0500 Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 14:55:52 -0500 Message-Id: <8C70054F30E8C8E-A44-3A1E4@mblk-d34.sysops.aol.com> From: em1897@aol.com References: <1641928994.20050326192811@wanadoo.fr> <8C700529A2DFD74-A44-3A157@mblk-d34.sysops.aol.com> <4245BCE1.6000201@makeworld.com> Received: from 24.47.116.25 by mblk-d34.sysops.aol.com (205.188.212.218) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Sat, 26 Mar 2005 14:55:52 -0500 X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI X-MB-Message-Type: User In-Reply-To: <4245BCE1.6000201@makeworld.com> X-Mailer: AOL WebMail 1.0.0.11984 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 To: racerx@makeworld.com X-AOL-IP: 205.188.212.218 cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: hyper threading. X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 19:56:07 -0000 I am offerring the correct information. Turning on SMP on an HT machine will kill the systems performance much more than hyperthreading will gain. I told him to test. The degradation is easily measurable. -----Original Message----- From: Chris To: em1897@aol.com Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Sent: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 13:49:53 -0600 Subject: Re: hyper threading. em1897@aol.com wrote: > This is the kind of disinformation I have been > referring to.... > > You'll get much better performance with 1 processor in > UP mode. I suggest you do some testing. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Anthony Atkielski > To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > Sent: Sat, 26 Mar 2005 19:28:11 +0100 > Subject: Re: hyper threading. > > Perttu Laine writes: > >> I have 3,4ghz ht processor and freebsd shows up only one processors. I >> suppose it should show two in ht models? so, GENERIC kernel doesn't >> support it? but should I add to kernel config to enable it? by reading >> config examples I think this should be enough: >> >> options SMP > > > Yes, that's all you need. Just add that line, rebuild and reinstall the > kernel, and you're all set. Works great. Hyperthreading doesn't buy > you as much as truly separate processors, but it helps you get more bang > for the buck out of your single processor (depending on the type of > workload you run). > If you feel someone is in error - feel free to jump in and offer what you feel to be correct information. Sometimes sitting back and not correcting someone is far worse then someone offering information based on what they know, experience, or what have you. In this case, by NOT offering the correct information, YOU are just as much to blame for what you say is going on. For those of us that don't answer, we either don't know (as is the case wit myself) OR, they have not had a chance to read the thread. -- Best regards, Chris It is a simple task to make things complex, but a complex task to make them simple.