From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Sun May 11 09:05:25 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E013037B404 for ; Sun, 11 May 2003 09:05:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail.sandvine.com (sandvine.com [199.243.201.138]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6BCA43FF3 for ; Sun, 11 May 2003 09:05:24 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from don@sandvine.com) Received: by mail.sandvine.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Sun, 11 May 2003 12:05:24 -0400 Message-ID: From: Don Bowman To: 'Kevin Day' , Don Bowman Date: Sun, 11 May 2003 12:05:23 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: RE: polling(4) and idle time/cpu usage percentages X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 11 May 2003 16:05:26 -0000 From: Kevin Day [mailto:toasty@dragondata.com] > At 10:44 AM 5/11/2003, you wrote: > >I tried the hack, as below. The other thing that makes idle > >wildly inaccurate is the symmetric multi-threading on the xeon > >(aka hyperthreading). > > Smack me if I'm wrong, but you can't compile the kernel with > DEVICE_POLLING > active at the same time as SMP. Without SMP you don't get any of the > advantages/effects of HTT. > > (or has polling been made to play nice with SMP in -current?) DEVICE_POLLING actually works fine with SMP, there was just some question as to whether it was the best way to make use of the SMP. I just removed the #error in kern_poll.c in the #ifdef SMP case. --don