Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:31:50 -0400 (EDT) From: mre2007@cs.columbia.edu To: "Dave Dolson" <ddolson@sandvine.com> Cc: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Subject: RE: "Kernel Hacking"/Developing on a HT CPU versus "physical" CPUs Message-ID: <15450.148.104.5.33.1096302710.squirrel@webmail.cs.columbia.edu> In-Reply-To: <A8535F8D62F3644997E91F4F66E341FC4063EC@exchange.sandvine.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
Dave: yes this makes sense! So, does the scheduler take this into consideration? -Marc > Here is one example: > If you have dual HT processors, this looks like 4 CPUs to the O/S. > For performance reasons, the scheduler should not treat them equally. > If there are two threads to run, they should be put on different physical > processors (vs. two hyperthreads of the same processor). > > > David Dolson (ddolson@sandvine.com, www.sandvine.com) > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: owner-freebsd-smp@freebsd.org >> [mailto:owner-freebsd-smp@freebsd.org]On Behalf Of >> mre2007@cs.columbia.edu >> Sent: Saturday, September 25, 2004 10:48 AM >> To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org >> Subject: "Kernel Hacking"/Developing on a HT CPU versus >> "physical" CPUs >> >> >> Hey, I was wondering if from a developing/"kernel hacking" >> standpoint, are >> hyperthreading and two "physical" CPUs any different? At what >> point do the >> differences have to be taken into consideration when working on the >> FreeBSD kernel/scheduler/etc? I'm looking to start contributing to the >> FreeBSD project and am trying to get some hardware set aside. >> >> Thanks! >> -Marc >> _______________________________________________ >> freebsd-smp@freebsd.org mailing list >> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-smp >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-smp-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >> >home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15450.148.104.5.33.1096302710.squirrel>