From owner-freebsd-stable Fri Aug 9 13:34: 4 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84E9537B400 for ; Fri, 9 Aug 2002 13:34:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from slimy.rodal.no (ti121210a080-0683.bb.online.no [80.212.2.171]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A00D43E84 for ; Fri, 9 Aug 2002 13:33:58 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from morten@rodal.no) Received: from slurp.rodal.no (morten@slurp.rodal.no [IPv6:2001:470:1f00:211:210:4bff:fe3e:2358]) by slimy.rodal.no (8.12.3/8.12.3) with ESMTP id g79KXu6A030807; Fri, 9 Aug 2002 22:33:56 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from morten@slurp.rodal.no) Received: (from morten@localhost) by slurp.rodal.no (8.12.5/8.12.5/Submit) id g79KXu2v048291; Fri, 9 Aug 2002 22:33:56 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from morten) Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2002 22:33:55 +0200 From: Morten Rodal To: David Schultz Cc: kpieckiel@smartrafficenter.org, Bosko Milekic , Mario Pranjic , freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: SMP kernel: FreeBSD vs. Linux 2.4.x Message-ID: <20020809203355.GE6050@slurp.rodal.no> References: <20020809091008.A87124@unixdaemons.com> <20020809164411.GC78503@pacer.dmz.smartrafficenter.org> <20020809171743.GB290@HAL9000.homeunix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="d9ADC0YsG2v16Js0" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20020809171743.GB290@HAL9000.homeunix.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG --d9ADC0YsG2v16Js0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Aug 09, 2002 at 10:17:43AM -0700, David Schultz wrote: > Unix was originally designed for uniprocessor systems. > Consequently, some assumptions were made that are reasonable and > result in lower locking overhead for uniprocessors, but that > aren't valid for multiprocessors. >=20 > http://www.lemis.com/~grog/SMPng/USENIX/ >=20 > > Second, what are KSEs? >=20 > cf. Scheduler Activations: >=20 > http://citeseer.nj.nec.com/anderson92scheduler.html >=20 How does this compare to the approach NetBSD is taking? The docs above helped, but I am still a bit puzzled. http://daily.daemonnews.org/view_story.php3?story_id=3D2969 --=20 Morten Rodal // // PGP ID 2D75595B // 22DE D67A 1AEA EF94 872A 9384 6D67 B50B 2D75 595B // --d9ADC0YsG2v16Js0 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQE9VCczbWe1Cy11WVsRAreFAKDJpK7nJa0uKJ2mq+gwzKdKuT0fOgCgzRlQ PhPBvQjpiZ2KwNMpgstyx1s= =v66A -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --d9ADC0YsG2v16Js0-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message