Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 18:59:58 +0000 (GMT) From: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> To: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Frank Behrens <frank@ilse.behrens.de>, Jeff Roberson <jeff@FreeBSD.org>, "current@freebsd.org" <current@FreeBSD.org>, stable@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: The machdep.hyperthreading_allowed & ULE weirdness in 7.1 Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.0902231859210.92010@fledge.watson.org> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.0902231853040.92010@fledge.watson.org> References: <alpine.BSF.2.00.0902231000300.98609@fledge.watson.org> <200902231652.n1NGqMxH047731@post.behrens.de> <49A2DE9D.4090902@FreeBSD.org> <alpine.BSF.2.00.0902231801450.92010@fledge.watson.org> <49A2ED6A.9040202@FreeBSD.org> <alpine.BSF.2.00.0902231853040.92010@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 23 Feb 2009, Robert Watson wrote:
> It's not quite that simple -- in a world of device drivers pinning threads to
> CPUs for workload distribution, callout threads and sched_bind()/sched_pin()
> for crypto load distribution, etc, you need a whole infrastructure for
> software-disabled CPUs. Disabling it using the BIOS or device.hints is the
> only reliable way to do this right now. Changing the architecture of the
> kernel to disable CPU cores after boot is a significant investment of work,
^^^^ s/disable/desirable/
Robert N M Watson
Computer Laboratory
University of Cambridge
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.BSF.2.00.0902231859210.92010>