From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Sep 19 07:33:53 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D756C16A4CE; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 07:33:53 +0000 (GMT) Received: from ylpvm15.prodigy.net (ylpvm15-ext.prodigy.net [207.115.57.46]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9427E43D2D; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 07:33:53 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from julian@elischer.org) Received: from elischer.org (adsl-68-120-130-250.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [68.120.130.250])i8J7XqqM029572; Sun, 19 Sep 2004 03:33:53 -0400 Message-ID: <414D365E.2030200@elischer.org> Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 00:33:50 -0700 From: Julian Elischer User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.4b) Gecko/20030524 X-Accept-Language: en, hu MIME-Version: 1.0 To: timh@tjhawkins.com References: <00d001c49dd4$7382dc40$6401a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> In-Reply-To: <00d001c49dd4$7382dc40$6401a8c0@yourw92p4bhlzg> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: smp@freebsd.org cc: advocacy@freebsd.org cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Please explain. X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 19 Sep 2004 07:33:54 -0000 timh@tjhawkins.com wrote: > 2 Major Issues: > > - FreeBSD has a processor affinity design issue thanks for the non combatative and diplomatically styled message? > > - The core kernel issues with FreeBSD is the horrible threading > support.There is so much crap in FreeBSD kernel. The multithreading issue in > freebsd has been delayed for nearly 6 years. They have just made work > arounds, not fixing the actual problem. It seems that the only real BSD that > has made big progress on the core issues is DragonflyBSD. Dragonfly BSD is a branch of freeBSD that we are all watching with great interest. The advantage that is available there is the decision to go back to teh drawing board and start from scratch, thereby breaking a lot, in the hope of being able to fix it again when teh parts afe all completed. It is a very interesting experiment and as such, FreeBSD developers in general are watching with interest. > > It appears that FreeBSD have a clear Multi-threading lock-in issue that > needs to be fixed. Not work arounds. According to many freebsd developers > nobody simply wants to fix this, is it true that the current smp work are > just 'work-arounds' not real fixing? Well if you could explain yourself in English I'd have more of a chance of answering your questions. The big challenge with FreeBSD and MP is that we have to get from a "here" (where there was no MP at all) the a "there" (where there is), while having every step of the way between being a runnable stable (within reason) system. This greatly limits how things are done. The current SMP work is not just "workarounds" but rather steps needed to get from A to B. Sometimes you can't see what the final picture is by looking at an intermediate step in isolation. > > The only thing holding FreeBSD back is the Multithreading issue. I wish you would explain this statement. It could be interpretted in so many ways that it really is almost meaningless. (Some of the interpretatiosn however are not..) > > Please clarify this. Sure.. how about you clarify your question first however. > > > _______________________________________________ > 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"