From owner-freebsd-smp  Wed May  7 10:34:09 1997
Return-Path: <owner-smp>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id KAA03639
          for smp-outgoing; Wed, 7 May 1997 10:34:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Ilsa.StevesCafe.com (Ilsa.StevesCafe.com [205.168.119.129])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA03634
          for <freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG>; Wed, 7 May 1997 10:34:06 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Ilsa.StevesCafe.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by Ilsa.StevesCafe.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA04643;
	Wed, 7 May 1997 11:32:34 -0600 (MDT)
Message-Id: <199705071732.LAA04643@Ilsa.StevesCafe.com>
X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0gamma 1/27/96
From: Steve Passe <smp@csn.net>
To: Stephen Roome <steve@visint.co.uk>
cc: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>, freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject: Re: Where to start SMP? 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Wed, 07 May 1997 14:37:01 BST."
             <Pine.BSF.3.91.970507143232.6423F-100000@bagpuss.visint.co.uk> 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Date: Wed, 07 May 1997 11:32:34 -0600
Sender: owner-smp@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi,

>Maybe, but surely some of the changes to run an efficient SMP system 
>should come at kernel compile level. Unless FreeBSD moves to a modular 
>system on the scale of something like HURD this looks likely to decrease 
>performance.

my rule is that when the choice is between "works faster/better" and
"more convient", "faster/better" wins.  I don't always win the "discussions"
where we make the final decision, but I'll always fight for that position.

--
Steve Passe	| powered by 
smp@csn.net	|            Symmetric MultiProcessor FreeBSD