Date: Sat, 25 May 2002 17:23:07 -0700 (PDT) From: John Polstra <jdp@polstra.com> To: smp@freebsd.org Cc: bright@mu.org Subject: Re: hyperthreading: myth or legend? (was Re: hyperthreading? (was Re: question)) Message-ID: <200205260023.g4Q0N7Q31590@vashon.polstra.com> In-Reply-To: <20020522172759.GV54960@elvis.mu.org> References: <20020514222840.GB1585@elvis.mu.org> <Pine.GHP.4.21.0205220940410.28331-100000@hpux38.dc.engr.scu.edu> <20020522172759.GV54960@elvis.mu.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In article <20020522172759.GV54960@elvis.mu.org>, Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org> wrote: > > Here's what I know: > The additional CPUs probe. > > A benchmarking utility reports equivelant performance to a 4 way > machine. FWIW, my experience has been different. Yesterday I tried both the latest -current and 4.5-RELEASE on a Dell 2650, and both kernels failed to probe the extra processor cores. My colleagues who have been working with the system told me that XP does detect them. Maybe XP stands for Xtra Processors? ;-) Under FreeBSD I ran the "mptable" command, and it lists only one CPU per physical processor module. So at least for this particular BIOS, the kernel would have to Just Know that each processor has 2 cores in order to utilize them. John -- John Polstra John D. Polstra & Co., Inc. Seattle, Washington USA "Disappointment is a good sign of basic intelligence." -- Chögyam Trungpa To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200205260023.g4Q0N7Q31590>