Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2006 06:34:31 +0800 From: David Xu <davidxu@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Cc: Kip Macy <kmacy@fsmware.com>, Ivan Voras <ivoras@fer.hr> Subject: Re: [PATCH] MAXCPU alterable in kernel config - needs testers Message-ID: <200610090634.31297.davidxu@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <4529667D.8070108@fer.hr> References: <2fd864e0610080423q7ba6bdeal656a223e662a5d@mail.gmail.com> <20061008135031.G83537@demos.bsdclusters.com> <4529667D.8070108@fer.hr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Monday 09 October 2006 04:58, Ivan Voras wrote: > Kip Macy wrote: > > It will only cover the single chip Niagara 2 boxes. > > Oh right, they'll doing multi chips in Niagara 2 :) Go Sun :) > > Still, single T2 chips should be more common, so I'd guess it will pay > to optimize for that case. > > (For the rest of the audience: Niagara 1 has 32 logical CPUs and > supports only one physical CPU/socket; Niagara 2 will have 64 logical > CPUs and support > 1 CPUs/sockets; so a 2 socket Niagara 2 box will have > 128 logical processors! Cue SciFi music...) > > Any word on how will they handle migration of threads across sockets (or > will it be OS's job)? Judging from T1 architecture, I think such event > would create a very large performance penalty, but I'm not an expert. > __________ The current 4BSD scheduler does not handle large number of cores very well, also the single sched_lock will be a bottleneck for such a configuration.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200610090634.31297.davidxu>