From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Jul 16 18:52:45 2010
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0ADE3106566C;
	Fri, 16 Jul 2010 18:52:45 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from jkim@FreeBSD.org)
From: Jung-uk Kim <jkim@FreeBSD.org>
To: freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.org
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 14:52:35 -0400
User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2
References: <201007151507.33998.jkim@FreeBSD.org>
	<201007152001.o6FK1mGq088944@lurza.secnetix.de>
	<20100716075525.GA96403@icarus.home.lan>
In-Reply-To: <20100716075525.GA96403@icarus.home.lan>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201007161452.37538.jkim@FreeBSD.org>
Cc: Oliver Fromme <olli@lurza.secnetix.de>, Andriy Gapon <avg@icyb.net.ua>,
	Jeremy Chadwick <freebsd@jdc.parodius.com>
Subject: Re: 8.1-PRERELEASE: CPU packages not detected correctly
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 18:52:45 -0000

On Friday 16 July 2010 03:55 am, Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 10:01:48PM +0200, Oliver Fromme wrote:
> > Jung-uk Kim wrote:
> >  > On Thursday 15 July 2010 01:56 pm, Andriy Gapon wrote:
> >  > > on 15/07/2010 19:57 Oliver Fromme said the following:
> >  > > > I patched topo_probe() so it calls topo_probe_0x4() after
> >  > > > topo_probe_0xb() if cpu_cores is still 0.  I think this
> >  > > > is a better fallback procedure.  With this patch,
> >  > > > cpu_cores gets the value 4 which is the correct one,
> >  > > > finally:
> >  > >
> >  > > [...]
> >  > > I think that your addition achieves this effect, perhaps
> >  > > just not as explicitly as I would preferred.
> >  > >
> >  > > Jung-uk, what do you think?
> >  >
> >  > Yes, you're right.  Please try new patch:
> >  >
> >  > http://people.freebsd.org/~jkim/mp_machdep2.diff
> >
> > Thank you!
> >
> > I will have access to that particular machine on Monday again,
> > so testing the new patch will have to wait until Monday.
> > But from looking at your patch it should have the same result
> > as my simpler patch, so it should work fine.
>
> I have a general question for everyone involved in this thread
> (which is highly educational/interesting -- thank you for all the
> info!):
>
> Does the problem reported affect actual performance/behaviour of
> FreeBSD kernel-wise at all, or is it just a cosmetical issue with
> regards to showing how many cores/threads there are?

Theoretically there is behavioral changes from scheduler.  jeff@ 
should be able to tell you more about this.

Jung-uk Kim