Date: Fri, 31 Dec 1999 02:57:51 -0700 (MST) From: "Chad R. Larson" <chad@DCFinc.com> To: msmith@FreeBSD.ORG (Mike Smith) Cc: tsikora@powerusersbbs.com, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Temperature Findings Message-ID: <199912310957.CAA22452@freeway.dcfinc.com> In-Reply-To: <199912310627.WAA00576@mass.cdrom.com> from Mike Smith at "Dec 30, 99 10:27:02 pm"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
As I recall, Mike Smith wrote: >> o The standard 3.3-RELEASE UniProcessor kernel runs identical to >> Linux. > > This is because both systems use the HLT instruction, which has a low > power consumption. You've already been told this. > >> o FreeBSD SMP kernels immediately run hotter than the standard >> kernel. > > FreeBSD doesn't use HLT in the SMP implementation. You've been told > this as well. > >> Has anyone else checked this. Just checking the Generic versus a SMP >> kernel you should see this. > > This is commonly known behaviour. Your problem is simply that your > cooling setup is not adequate to support your system running at 100% duty > cycle. You've been told this already. You need to upgrade your cooling > arrangements, and you've been told _that_ already too. No wonder he feels like he's being called a yokel. So, how does the lack of HLTing explain why his system =doesn't= report itself as being hot when he runs two SETI@home processes under Linux? How come the difference is instantly apparent after the reboot--not subject to thermal inertia--if inadequate cooling were the culprit? -crl -- Chad R. Larson (CRL15) 602-953-1392 Brother, can you paradigm? chad@dcfinc.com chad@larsons.org larson1@home.net DCF, Inc. - 14623 North 49th Place, Scottsdale, Arizona 85254-2207 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199912310957.CAA22452>