Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2006 16:28:32 +0200 From: "Eric" <ericd@free.fr> To: "Mark Kirkwood" <markir@paradise.net.nz>, "Petri Helenius" <pete@he.iki.fi> Cc: Lucas Holt <luke@foolishgames.com>, freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Low perf with smp Message-ID: <027f01c657f4$0d0a66a0$65fd24c0@Eric> References: <009301c65418$cc029f30$65fd24c0@Eric><64659004-E643-4044-AAED-076E0CC91977@foolishgames.com><01a901c65493$77ad2740$65fd24c0@Eric><442DC9B6.2090200@paradise.net.nz> <442EAA0A.8030704@he.iki.fi> <442F0E1B.9090505@paradise.net.nz>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Sorry for time to answer, here is result in both case (with/withou SMP) with freebsd 4.11 : kern.timecounter.method: 0 kern.timecounter.hardware: i8254 If you want I can do new installation with freebsd 6.0 Thanks, Eric. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Kirkwood" <markir@paradise.net.nz> To: "Petri Helenius" <pete@he.iki.fi> Cc: "Eric" <ericd@free.fr>; <freebsd-smp@freebsd.org>; "Lucas Holt" <luke@foolishgames.com> Sent: Sunday, April 02, 2006 1:34 AM Subject: Re: Low perf with smp > Petri Helenius wrote: >> Mark Kirkwood wrote: >> >>> >>> As I understand it, when you activate SMP a more accurate, but slower >>> timecounter is chosen (typically 'i8254' instead of 'TSC' on intel HW). >> >> >> ACPI-fast should be the default with SMP. It's significantly faster than >> i8254 >> > > Yeah - if his Dell has ACPI enabled. However, ACPI-fast is still slower > than say TSC. > > Eric, do you want to show us the output of > > $ sysctl kern.timecounter > > with and without SMP? > > Cheers > > Mark > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-smp@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-smp > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-smp-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?027f01c657f4$0d0a66a0$65fd24c0>