From owner-freebsd-arch Sat Oct 5 0:30:13 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 931) id 8896837B401; Sat, 5 Oct 2002 00:30:12 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 5 Oct 2002 00:30:12 -0700 From: Juli Mallett To: David Francheski Cc: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Running independent kernel instances on dual-Xeon/E7500 system Message-ID: <20021005003012.A14963@FreeBSD.org> References: <006001c26c03$6a6e2420$3600010a@caymas.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <006001c26c03$6a6e2420$3600010a@caymas.com>; from davidf@caymas.com on Fri, Oct 04, 2002 at 05:08:55PM -0700 Organisation: The FreeBSD Project X-Alternate-Addresses: , , , , X-Towel: Yes X-LiveJournal: flata, jmallett X-Negacore: Yes Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG * De: David Francheski [ Data: 2002-10-04 ] [ Subjecte: Running independent kernel instances on dual-Xeon/E7500 system ] > > I have a dual-Xeon processor (with E7500 chipset) motherboard. > Can anybody tell me what the development effort would be to > boot and run two independent copies of the FreeBSD kernel, > one on each Xeon processor? By this I mean that an SMP > enabled kernel would not be utilized, each kernel would be UP. You want to take OSF Mach and port -current to run on top of it just like the Lites project did. -- Juli Mallett | FreeBSD: The Power To Serve Will break world for fulltime employment. | finger jmallett@FreeBSD.org http://people.FreeBSD.org/~jmallett/ | Support my FreeBSD hacking! To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message