From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Feb 24 19:17:25 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA6341065680 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2009 19:17:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sam@freebsd.org) Received: from ebb.errno.com (ebb.errno.com [69.12.149.25]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B09D28FC18 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2009 19:17:25 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sam@freebsd.org) Received: from trouble.errno.com (trouble.errno.com [10.0.0.248]) (authenticated bits=0) by ebb.errno.com (8.13.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id n1OJHPoE026668 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 24 Feb 2009 11:17:25 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sam@freebsd.org) Message-ID: <49A447C5.2020903@freebsd.org> Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 11:17:25 -0800 From: Sam Leffler Organization: FreeBSD Project User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (X11/20081209) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Siddharth Prakash Singh References: <1aa142960902241100u671d5f90u769ad98e08fabb43@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-DCC-sonic.net-Metrics: ebb.errno.com; whitelist Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Google SoC 2009 Idea X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 19:17:26 -0000 Siddharth Prakash Singh wrote: > On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 12:30 AM, Ray Mihm wrote: > >>> Title: Multicore Aware Process Scheduler. >>> I have not gone through the process scheduler code of Free BSD. >>> Hence, I am not yet aware about the current support for Multicore >>> Architectures. >>> >> Talk to jeff@freebsd.org, the author of ULE. >> > > What are your opinions on this project? What is the scope of this project? > >>> Linux Kernel 2.6.* currently supports SMP, SMT, NUMA architectures. >>> > > Does the current scheduler has support for "CPU affinity/binding", > mechanism for distinguishing varying capability of CPUs. > >> These may be there already in ULE, although I'm not sure about NUMA. >> >> Ray >> >> > > Waiting for your response, > > I note you sent this same note to the netbsd mailing lists. You might want to do some more investigation before you propose a project. Sam