From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Apr 10 03:41:12 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0353237B401
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 03:41:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailman.zeta.org.au (mailman.zeta.org.au [203.26.10.16])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B779243F3F
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Thu, 10 Apr 2003 03:41:10 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from bde@zeta.org.au)
Received: from katana.zip.com.au (katana.zip.com.au [61.8.7.246])
	by mailman.zeta.org.au (8.9.3/8.8.7) with ESMTP id UAA21443;
	Thu, 10 Apr 2003 20:41:03 +1000
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 20:41:02 +1000 (EST)
From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
X-X-Sender: bde@gamplex.bde.org
To: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0304100028020.55025-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>
Message-ID: <20030410201727.C3091@gamplex.bde.org>
References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0304100028020.55025-100000@InterJet.elischer.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
cc: FreeBSD current users <current@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: variable mp_ncpu
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 10:41:12 -0000

On Thu, 10 Apr 2003, Julian Elischer wrote:

> ok It's too late at night.. hw.ncpu does exist in UP
> what I really meant to say is:
> could there always be the kernel variable mp_ncpus?
>
> for example the following code is in the kernel:
>  605         /* Too bad, why hasn't kernel always a cpu counter !? */
>  606 #ifdef SMP
>  607         ncpus = mp_ncpus;
>  608 #else
>  609         ncpus = 1;
>  610 #endif
>
> ok, so maybe it would need to be renamed, but at teh moment I need to
> have 2 kernel modules, one for SMP and one for UP to be able to cope
> with this if it needs to know how many cpus there are..
> (or am I missing something still)

Yes :-).  The kernel has a bitmap of cpus and a macro (only one) for
accessing it.  The maximum number of valid bits in the bitmap is
MAX_CPU which is 1 for the !SMP case and > 1 for the SMP case.
(I think there is actually only the acess macro for the !SMP case).

Bruce

Bruce