Date: Wed, 24 May 2006 09:54:31 +0000 From: Astrodog <astrodog@gmail.com> To: "Lars Heidieker" <lars@heidieker.de> Cc: Darren Pilgrim <darren.pilgrim@bitfreak.org>, current@freebsd.org, Wilko Bulte <wb@freebie.xs4all.nl> Subject: Re: FreeBSD is now self-hosting on the UltraSPARC T1 Message-ID: <2fd864e0605240254t3c730d27v772e439584a1aac7@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <EC184144-60AB-4F61-8895-48A786AA3E05@heidieker.de> References: <1e4841eb0605211854i44c4aa4cm9dfc72506c2232ea@mail.gmail.com> <FB03D201-4154-411E-AFE4-572CEBF76A92@shire.net> <1e4841eb0605221133s428d9136p3d5f7eff964167f4@mail.gmail.com> <2B495EE0-9E81-4CDD-84AF-D3789C9FCB95@shire.net> <b41c75520605221243x37868a3cq9bb57609df7205ad@mail.gmail.com> <20060522195938.GA1267@freebie.xs4all.nl> <44721E78.2050002@bitfreak.org> <EC184144-60AB-4F61-8895-48A786AA3E05@heidieker.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 5/23/06, Lars Heidieker <lars@heidieker.de> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > > On 22 May 2006, at 22:26, Darren Pilgrim wrote: > > > Wilko Bulte wrote: > >> On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 09:43:11PM +0200, Claus Guttesen wrote.. > >>>>>>> on topic, the Opterons aren't SMP either, and neither are the > >>>> ht-Xeons... > >>>>>> ... > >>>>> The MultiProcessor Opterons are _NOT_ SMP, they are _NUMA_ > >>>>> machines, > >>> Not really related to the original topic any longer, is it? > >> Decent bikesheds never are.. > > > > At least people are being polite and not messing up the threading > > by changing the subject header. :) > > > Yes that would be extremely NUMA because of the latencies occurring > with such a thread migration ;-) > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (Darwin) > > iD8DBQFEcsT1cxuYqjT7GRYRAhXZAJ9YGIW279AByboC9V4VRnYG78pprwCguRWR > E9GIqAo+y9AeNulP2rMcX5o=3D > =3DxW9J > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org= " > As a side note here, I'm working on the Opteron-isnt-SMP thing at the moment.... I'm just calling it "OPTERON", since.... well.... nothing else fits with it very well, and nothing else FreeBSD runs on supports it anyway, I believe. >From what I can tell, it would be.... unwise to classify Opteron as NUMA, atleast to the kernel, since the overhead for real NUMA clusters, with scheduling, and VM stuff would be somewhat excessive. Opteron is logically NUMA, (When using multiple sockets), but practically, I'm finding there's an excessive performance penalty when you try to treat it strictly as such, as compared to calling it SMP, so the implimentation is actually ending up somewhere in between. Note that the above applies only to MULTIPLE SOCKETS. A dual core Opteron, or Athlon64 X2 in a single socket is, in every sense of the word, SMP. I don't even want to get into naming nightmare of multiple dual core Opterons. ;) As for Intel's HT.... I suggest, "EXTRA_OVERHEAD_JUST_FOR_FUN", or alternately, "LEAVE_THE_EBRAKE_ON". Perhaps in light of Colin's thing.... "READ_MY_KEYS" would work, too. --- Harrison Grundy
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?2fd864e0605240254t3c730d27v772e439584a1aac7>