Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 07 May 1997 12:05:31 -0600
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? 
Message-ID:  <199705071805.MAA04770@Ilsa.StevesCafe.com>
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 07 May 1997 19:06:41 BST." <Pine.BSF.3.91.970507185110.6423P-100000@bagpuss.visint.co.uk> 

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi,

> I don't profess to know which is faster/better I just wouldn't want to see
> SMP get bastardised into some weird runtime option you can turn on and off
> really easily. I don't think that's going to be a performance boost ?

Nor do I.  I don't see one kernel binary ever being able to support both UP
and SMP (unless the UP version takes the performance hit).  Its a struggle
just to do it with the same sources!

I do see most of the 'minor' SMP options being made runtime, but only within
the context of an SMP only kernel.

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





Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199705071805.MAA04770>