From owner-freebsd-smp  Sun Apr 27 21:00:27 1997
Return-Path: <owner-smp>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id VAA19150
          for smp-outgoing; Sun, 27 Apr 1997 21:00:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from cypher.net (black@zen.pratt.edu [205.232.115.155])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id VAA19139
          for <FreeBSD-SMP@FreeBSD.org>; Sun, 27 Apr 1997 21:00:22 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from black@localhost) by cypher.net (8.8.5/8.7.1) id XAA08873; Sun, 27 Apr 1997 23:58:03 -0400
Date: Sun, 27 Apr 1997 23:58:02 -0400 (EDT)
From: Ben Black <black@zen.cypher.net>
To: Chris Csanady <ccsanady@nyx.pr.mcs.net>
cc: Chuck Robey <chuckr@mat.net>, FreeBSD-SMP@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: SMP 
In-Reply-To: <199704280357.WAA12920@nyx.pr.mcs.net>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.91.970427235743.32065P-100000@zen.cypher.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-smp@FreeBSD.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

i sit corrected.  i expect they will eventually migrate to a fully 
threaded kernel.

On Sun, 27 Apr 1997, Chris Csanady wrote:

> 
> >freebsd-smp is not the best example of how to do SMP.  it uses the 
> >simplest method: one giant kernel lock.  i don't know that it is 
> >particularly representative of advanced SMP operating systems (though 
> >linux also uses a giant kernel lock).
> 
> Actually, linux has moved to a slightly finer grain system.  Now they
> have seperate locks for the run queues, scheduler, and some other
> things..
> 
> --Chris Csanady
>