Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2015 10:44:51 -0700 From: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> To: Harrison Grundy <harrison.grundy@astrodoggroup.com> Cc: "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: RFC: Simplfying hyperthreading distinctions Message-ID: <CAJ-Vmon_P3vMBtJcEDcPkWdfKQmH==7rqa%2BeUpn1SJoRqc7gWg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <550EDF87.2070101@astrodoggroup.com> References: <1640664.8z9mx3EOQs@ralph.baldwin.cx> <54FA1180.3080605@astrodoggroup.com> <1526311.uylCbgv5VB@ralph.baldwin.cx> <20150320123823.GA49621@zxy.spb.ru> <550DC564.5020802@freebsd.org> <20150321214336.334eaea5@nonamehost.local> <20150322100744.5b390591@ernst.home> <550EDF87.2070101@astrodoggroup.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
... or maybe the scheduler shouldn't be the primary source of the CPU topology information, but instead should be a consumer. :) -a
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJ-Vmon_P3vMBtJcEDcPkWdfKQmH==7rqa%2BeUpn1SJoRqc7gWg>