From owner-freebsd-smp Mon Nov 1 21: 8:58 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from cecgw1.cec.co.jp (proxy1.cec.co.jp [210.128.176.4]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C53E14CEC for ; Mon, 1 Nov 1999 21:08:53 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from hojo@cec.co.jp) Received: from goofy.cec.co.jp (goofy.cec.co.jp [133.231.2.20]) by cecgw1.cec.co.jp (8.8.8+2.7Wbeta7/3.7W99051321) with SMTP id OAA12552 for ; Tue, 2 Nov 1999 14:08:51 +0900 (JST) Received: by goofy.cec.co.jp (8.6.11+2.4W/3.3W7-mailhub-950823) id OAA06658; Tue, 2 Nov 1999 14:08:51 +0900 Received: by mugi.cec.co.jp (4.1/3.3W) id AA25185; Tue, 2 Nov 99 14:08:50 JST Date: Tue, 2 Nov 99 14:08:50 JST From: hojo@cec.co.jp (Hiroshi Hojo) Message-Id: <9911020508.AA25185@mugi.cec.co.jp> To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org auth 89085b52 unsubscribe freebsd-smp hojo@cec.co.jp To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Mon Nov 1 21:11:58 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from cecgw1.cec.co.jp (proxy1.cec.co.jp [210.128.176.4]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 563FA15120 for ; Mon, 1 Nov 1999 21:11:51 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from hojo@cec.co.jp) Received: from goofy.cec.co.jp (goofy.cec.co.jp [133.231.2.20]) by cecgw1.cec.co.jp (8.8.8+2.7Wbeta7/3.7W99051321) with SMTP id OAA12568 for ; Tue, 2 Nov 1999 14:11:50 +0900 (JST) Received: by goofy.cec.co.jp (8.6.11+2.4W/3.3W7-mailhub-950823) id OAA06819; Tue, 2 Nov 1999 14:11:50 +0900 Received: by mugi.cec.co.jp (4.1/3.3W) id AA25356; Tue, 2 Nov 99 14:11:49 JST Date: Tue, 2 Nov 99 14:11:49 JST From: hojo@cec.co.jp (Hiroshi Hojo) Message-Id: <9911020511.AA25356@mugi.cec.co.jp> To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org auth 89085b52 unsubscribe Majordomo hojo@cec.co.jp To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Tue Nov 2 16:21:12 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from nomis.simon-shapiro.org (nomis.simon-shapiro.org [209.86.126.163]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E65F9152B2 for ; Tue, 2 Nov 1999 16:21:07 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from shimon@simon-shapiro.org) Received: (qmail 74926 invoked from network); 3 Nov 1999 00:21:06 -0000 Received: from localhost.simon-shapiro.org (HELO simon-shapiro.org) (127.0.0.1) by localhost.simon-shapiro.org with SMTP; 3 Nov 1999 00:21:06 -0000 Message-ID: <381F7FF2.9839A584@simon-shapiro.org> Date: Tue, 02 Nov 1999 19:21:06 -0500 From: Simon Shapiro Organization: Simon's Garage X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (X11; I; FreeBSD 3.3-STABLE i386) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Subject: panic Content-Type: text/plain; charset= Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org (Sorry for the double post. Me'thinks this is the right list for this wrong) Given: * Dell Poweredge 1300/600 with 1024MB or RAM * RELENG_3 as of 1730 EDT * Config with: options "VM86" options SMP options APIC_IO options NCPU=4 options NBUS=6 options NAPIC=2 options NINTR=48 What does this panic mean? atkbdc0 at 0x60-0x6f on motherboard atkbd0 irq 1 on isa psm0 not found panic: rslock: cpu: 0, addr: 0xc032c5c0, lock: 0x00000001 mp_lock = 00000001; cpuid = 0; lapic.id = 01000000 Debugger("panic") Stopped at Debugger+0x37: movl $0,in_Debugger db> trace Debugger(c0289db6) at Debugger+0x37 panic(c02490f9,0,c032c5c0,1,c02601e7) at panic+0xa4 bsl1(c02e66c0,c02e66c0,c02e7e54,39d000,0) at bsl1 config_isadev_c(c02e66c0,c02db7e8,0,c0395f90,c025bee4) at config_isadev_c+0x8e config_isadev(c02e66c0,c02db7e8) at config_isadev+0x10 isa_configure(c0395fac,c0158993,0,393c00,39d000) at isa_configure+0x120 configure(0) at configure+0x20 main(c0395fb8,c016f909,c0403000,2000,2000) at main+0x83 begin() at begin+0x55 -- Sincerely Yours, Shimon@Simon-Shapiro.ORG 404.664.6401 Simon Shapiro Unwritten code has no bugs and executes at twice the speed of mouth To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Tue Nov 2 18:10:57 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from lor.watermarkgroup.com (lor.watermarkgroup.com [207.202.73.33]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5924314D50 for ; Tue, 2 Nov 1999 18:09:15 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from luoqi@watermarkgroup.com) Received: (from luoqi@localhost) by lor.watermarkgroup.com (8.8.8/8.8.8) id VAA00363; Tue, 2 Nov 1999 21:09:10 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from luoqi) Date: Tue, 2 Nov 1999 21:09:10 -0500 (EST) From: Luoqi Chen Message-Id: <199911030209.VAA00363@lor.watermarkgroup.com> To: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG, shimon@simon-shapiro.org Subject: Re: panic Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > What does this panic mean? > This means the same processor which held the simple lock at 0xc032c5c0 tried to lock it again. Because simple lock code is written in asm and without a stack frame, it didn't show up in the stack trace. Look up 0xc032c5c0 in the kernel's name list, it should give you a good clue on what went wrong. > atkbdc0 at 0x60-0x6f on motherboard > atkbd0 irq 1 on isa > psm0 not found > panic: rslock: cpu: 0, addr: 0xc032c5c0, lock: 0x00000001 > mp_lock = 00000001; cpuid = 0; lapic.id = 01000000 > Debugger("panic") > Stopped at Debugger+0x37: movl $0,in_Debugger > db> trace > Debugger(c0289db6) at Debugger+0x37 > panic(c02490f9,0,c032c5c0,1,c02601e7) at panic+0xa4 > bsl1(c02e66c0,c02e66c0,c02e7e54,39d000,0) at bsl1 > config_isadev_c(c02e66c0,c02db7e8,0,c0395f90,c025bee4) at config_isadev_c+0x8e > config_isadev(c02e66c0,c02db7e8) at config_isadev+0x10 > isa_configure(c0395fac,c0158993,0,393c00,39d000) at isa_configure+0x120 > configure(0) at configure+0x20 > main(c0395fb8,c016f909,c0403000,2000,2000) at main+0x83 > begin() at begin+0x55 > > -- > > > Sincerely Yours, Shimon@Simon-Shapiro.ORG > 404.664.6401 > Simon Shapiro > > Unwritten code has no bugs and executes at twice the speed of mouth > -lq To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Wed Nov 3 7:34: 4 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mail.zuhause.org (c2-178.xtlab.com [205.215.217.178]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3EA8214FBA for ; Wed, 3 Nov 1999 07:33:57 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from bruce@zuhause.mn.org) Received: by mail.zuhause.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 0F8F97C34; Wed, 3 Nov 1999 09:32:11 -0600 (CST) From: Bruce Albrecht MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <14368.21882.824380.134599@celery.zuhause.org> Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 09:32:10 -0600 (CST) To: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Good SMP Motherboards X-Mailer: VM 6.72 under 20.4 "Emerald" XEmacs Lucid Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org I'm looking for a good SMP motherboard for $150 or less. Any recommendations? If I want also onboard SCSI, what's a good, cheap MB run? To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Wed Nov 3 9:50: 3 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mail.enteract.com (mail.enteract.com [207.229.143.33]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 324871553C for ; Wed, 3 Nov 1999 09:49:50 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dscheidt@enteract.com) Received: from shell-1.enteract.com (dscheidt@shell-1.enteract.com [207.229.143.40]) by mail.enteract.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id LAA47413; Wed, 3 Nov 1999 11:49:14 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from dscheidt@enteract.com) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 11:49:07 -0600 (CST) From: David Scheidt To: Bruce Albrecht Cc: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Good SMP Motherboards In-Reply-To: <14368.21882.824380.134599@celery.zuhause.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Wed, 3 Nov 1999, Bruce Albrecht wrote: > I'm looking for a good SMP motherboard for $150 or less. Any > recommendations? If I want also onboard SCSI, what's a good, cheap MB > run? I like the giga-byte GA-6BXD. About $140, but sometimes hard to find. There are versions with built-in SCSI but they aren't that much cheaper than anything else. A PCI SCSI adapter is cheaper, unless of course you need all the slots. David Scheidt To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Wed Nov 3 16: 5:53 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from dorifer.heim3.tu-clausthal.de (dorifer.heim3.tu-clausthal.de [139.174.243.252]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE9EB15132 for ; Wed, 3 Nov 1999 16:05:44 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from olli@dorifer.heim3.tu-clausthal.de) Received: (from olli@localhost) by dorifer.heim3.tu-clausthal.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA05773 for freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 01:05:41 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from olli) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 01:05:41 +0100 (CET) From: Oliver Fromme Message-Id: <199911040005.BAA05773@dorifer.heim3.tu-clausthal.de> To: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Good SMP Motherboards Organization: Administration Heim 3 Reply-To: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 RZTUC(3) PL2] Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org David Scheidt wrote in list.freebsd-smp: > On Wed, 3 Nov 1999, Bruce Albrecht wrote: > > I'm looking for a good SMP motherboard for $150 or less. Any > > recommendations? If I want also onboard SCSI, what's a good, cheap MB > > run? > > I like the giga-byte GA-6BXD. "Me too!" :) I had the MSI MS-6120 before, but it had a very bad memory bandwidth, compared to the GA-6BXD. Although same chipset, same DIMMs, same CPUs. I was surprised that the motherboard design can make that much of a difference. I didn't notice it very much in "normal" use (compiling etc.), but memory-bound applications run much better with the improved design of the Gigabyte board. The Seti@home client runs about 50% faster on it! Regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, Leibnizstr. 18/61, 38678 Clausthal, Germany (Info: finger userinfo:olli@dorifer.heim3.tu-clausthal.de) "In jedem Stück Kohle wartet ein Diamant auf seine Geburt" (Terry Pratchett) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Wed Nov 3 16:22:11 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from cain.gsoft.com.au (genesi.lnk.telstra.net [139.130.136.161]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 455E2155A1 for ; Wed, 3 Nov 1999 16:22:00 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from doconnor@gsoft.com.au) Received: from cain.gsoft.com.au (doconnor@cain [203.38.152.97]) by cain.gsoft.com.au (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id KAA14336; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 10:50:17 +1030 (CST) (envelope-from doconnor@gsoft.com.au) Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.3.1 [p0] on FreeBSD X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <14368.21882.824380.134599@celery.zuhause.org> Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 10:50:17 +1030 (CST) From: "Daniel O'Connor" To: Bruce Albrecht Subject: RE: Good SMP Motherboards Cc: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On 03-Nov-99 Bruce Albrecht wrote: > I'm looking for a good SMP motherboard for $150 or less. Any > recommendations? If I want also onboard SCSI, what's a good, cheap MB > run? Well the cheapest SMP mobo I have seen is made by Epox and they seem to work pretty well.. They have onboard SCSI, but that increases the prices by a factor of about 3.5. Personally I would get the Epox board then an Advansys SCSI controller.. Its cheaper. --- Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au "The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from." -- Andrew Tanenbaum To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Wed Nov 3 16:34:58 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mail.enteract.com (mail.enteract.com [207.229.143.33]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 914121506A for ; Wed, 3 Nov 1999 16:34:47 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dscheidt@enteract.com) Received: from shell-2.enteract.com (dscheidt@shell-2.enteract.com [207.229.143.41]) by mail.enteract.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id SAA19280 for ; Wed, 3 Nov 1999 18:34:31 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from dscheidt@enteract.com) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 18:34:31 -0600 (CST) From: David Scheidt To: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Good SMP Motherboards In-Reply-To: <199911040005.BAA05773@dorifer.heim3.tu-clausthal.de> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org oN tHU, 4 nOV 1999, oLIVER fROMME WROTE: > David Scheidt wrote in list.freebsd-smp: > > On Wed, 3 Nov 1999, Bruce Albrecht wrote: > > > I'm looking for a good SMP motherboard for $150 or less. Any > > > recommendations? If I want also onboard SCSI, what's a good, cheap MB > > > run? > > > > I like the giga-byte GA-6BXD. > > "Me too!" :) > One other board that might be worth taking a look at is the ABIT BP6, which is designed for dual-Celerons. SMP Celeron systems are not as big a win as PII/PIIIs are, due in the main to small size of the cache. Depending on what you're doing with the box, this may or may not be an issue. I don't have any personal experience with the ABIT board, but I have heard good things about it, here and elsewhere. If memory prices would come down to sane levels again, I'd likely throw one together. David Scheidt To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Wed Nov 3 16:39:37 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mail-relay2.yahoo.com (mail-relay2.yahoo.com [206.251.17.77]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A12F31506A for ; Wed, 3 Nov 1999 16:39:14 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from chiem@yahoo-inc.com) Received: from hootie.yahoo.com (hootie.yahoo.com [205.216.162.161]) by mail-relay2.yahoo.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA12693; Wed, 3 Nov 1999 16:38:54 -0800 (PST) Received: (from chiem@localhost) by hootie.yahoo.com (8.8.8/8.6.12) id QAA09671; Wed, 3 Nov 1999 16:39:02 -0800 (PST) From: Keith Chiem Message-Id: <199911040039.QAA09671@hootie.yahoo.com> Subject: Re: Good SMP Motherboards In-Reply-To: from "Daniel O'Connor" at "Nov 4, 1999 10:50:17 am" To: doconnor@gsoft.com.au (Daniel O'Connor) Date: Wed, 3 Nov 1999 16:39:02 -0800 (PST) Cc: bruce@zuhause.mn.org, freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL47 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org I too am using an Epox KP6-BS motherboard. It has been rock solid as a workstation, and I have not found anything wrong with it. I think www.bxboards.com has a favorable review of it. ps. I'm using this motherboard with dual Celeron 366s overclocked to 550 and slot 1 converter boards. This system was purchased from outsideloop.com, and was the best bang for the buck that I could find. --k > > On 03-Nov-99 Bruce Albrecht wrote: > > I'm looking for a good SMP motherboard for $150 or less. Any > > recommendations? If I want also onboard SCSI, what's a good, cheap MB > > run? > > Well the cheapest SMP mobo I have seen is made by Epox and they seem to work > pretty well.. They have onboard SCSI, but that increases the prices by a factor > of about 3.5. > > Personally I would get the Epox board then an Advansys SCSI controller.. Its > cheaper. > > --- > Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer > for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au > "The nice thing about standards is that there > are so many of them to choose from." > -- Andrew Tanenbaum > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Wed Nov 3 23:37:22 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from penguin.wise.edt.ericsson.se (penguin-ext.wise.edt.ericsson.se [194.237.142.110]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B76C9150F2 for ; Wed, 3 Nov 1999 23:37:12 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from Joachim.Strombergson@emw.ericsson.se) Received: from poem.emw.ericsson.se (poem.emw.ericsson.se [136.225.49.25]) by penguin.wise.edt.ericsson.se (8.9.3/8.9.3/WIREfire-1.5) with ESMTP id IAA08280 for ; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 08:36:45 +0100 (MET) Received: from emw.ericsson.se (balvenie.mo.emw.ericsson.se [136.225.229.97]) by poem.emw.ericsson.se (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA18857 for ; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 08:36:45 +0100 (MET) Message-ID: <3821378D.D532AB2@emw.ericsson.se> Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 08:36:45 +0100 From: Joachim Strombergson Organization: Ericsson Microwave Systems AB X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7C-EMW [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.5.1 sun4u) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-smp Subject: Re: Good SMP Motherboards References: <199911040039.QAA09671@hootie.yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Tja! On 03-Nov-99 Bruce Albrecht wrote: > I'm looking for a good SMP motherboard for $150 or less. Any > recommendations? If I want also onboard SCSI, what's a good, cheap MB > run? I don't know how much they cost in the US, but when I bought my ABIT BP6 in June/July this summer I paid approx 160 USD for it. The board is a PPGA370 board for Celerons. I use two Celery 366:s on it and get a rock stable system @ 467MHz. I really like the extensive settings of the BIOS that includes temp watch, individual voltage control and fan control. I haven't done any comparison with other systems, I just appreciate how much faster it is compared to my old, P133 system. :-) BTW: Has aybody done any FreeBSD-SMP system rating? What would be good benchmarks? (Yes, I'm aware that there are quite a few factors involved - clock speed, mem speed, I/O, good MB design, OS setup Und So Weiter...) -- Med vänlig hälsning, Yours Joachim Strömbergson - Alltid i harmonisk svängning ---------------- Ericsson Microwave Systems AB ----------------- Joachim Strömbergson http://www.ericsson.se/microwave ASIC System on Silicon engineer, nice to CUTE animals. * Opinions above, expressed or implicit, are strictly personal * ------------- Spamfodder: regeringen@regeringen.se ------------- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Thu Nov 4 1:37:29 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from isbalham.ist.co.uk (isbalham.ist.co.uk [192.31.26.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAFF714CF8 for ; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 01:37:07 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rb@gid.co.uk) Received: from gid.co.uk (uucp@localhost) by isbalham.ist.co.uk (8.9.2/8.8.7) with UUCP id JAA37473 for FreeBSD.ORG!freebsd-smp; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 09:35:35 GMT (envelope-from rb@gid.co.uk) Received: from [194.32.164.2] by seagoon.gid.co.uk; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 09:32:19 GMT X-Sender: rb@194.32.164.1 Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <199911040005.BAA05773@dorifer.heim3.tu-clausthal.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 09:32:17 +0000 To: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG From: Bob Bishop Subject: Re: Good SMP Motherboards Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org At 1:05 am +0100 4/11/99, Oliver Fromme wrote: >David Scheidt wrote in list.freebsd-smp: > > I like the giga-byte GA-6BXD. > >"Me too!" :) And me! -- Bob Bishop (0118) 977 4017 international code +44 118 rb@gid.co.uk fax (0118) 989 4254 between 0800 and 1800 UK To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Thu Nov 4 4: 6: 7 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from gw0.boostworks.com (gw0.boostworks.com [194.167.81.213]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83B1C15062 for ; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 04:05:40 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from root@synx.com) Received: from synx.com (root@rn.synx.com [192.1.1.241]) by gw0.boostworks.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id NAA05362; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 13:04:29 +0100 (CET) Message-Id: <199911041204.NAA05362@gw0.boostworks.com> Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 13:04:26 +0100 (CET) From: Remy Nonnenmacher Reply-To: remy@synx.com Subject: Re: Good SMP Motherboards To: Joachim.Strombergson@emw.ericsson.se Cc: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <3821378D.D532AB2@emw.ericsson.se> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On 4 Nov, Joachim Strombergson wrote: > Tja! > > On 03-Nov-99 Bruce Albrecht wrote: >> I'm looking for a good SMP motherboard for $150 or less. Any >> recommendations? If I want also onboard SCSI, what's a good, cheap MB >> run? > > I don't know how much they cost in the US, but when I bought my ABIT BP6 > in June/July this summer I paid approx 160 USD for it. The board is a > PPGA370 board for Celerons. I use two Celery 366:s on it and get a rock > stable system @ 467MHz. I really like the extensive settings of the BIOS > that includes temp watch, individual voltage control and fan control. > > I haven't done any comparison with other systems, I just appreciate how > much faster it is compared to my old, P133 system. :-) > > BTW: Has aybody done any FreeBSD-SMP system rating? What would be good > benchmarks? > Here is some using the rc5des client software (latest version) : Abit BP6 2x466 Celerons, -CURRENT : 2.60 Mkey/s ( 100$/proc) C440GX+ 2xPIII Xeon 500, -STABLE : 2.73 MKey/s (10000$/proc) L440GX+ 2xPIII 500 , -CURRENT : 2.82 Mkey/s ( 260$/proc) No overclocking. The C and L 440 are pure Intel boxed rack servers (SC440 and LB440GX). All Mobos uses ECC-SDRAM, no EDO. Remarks: - We would have expected the Xeon machine to perform better than the PIII standard processor. In this matter, rc5des and dry say : No real difference. - CURRENT implements a kind of processor affinity that seems helpfull. - I can't upgrade the Xeon machine to CURRENT since it's a production machine but I hope to see improvements as soon as it will be. (Jordan, fork, fork !! ;) ). - Linear interpolation for a Celeron 500 would lead to 2.80 Mkey/s which is nearly what gave the PIII. If this is exact, the performance/price ratio is outstanding. - This is a pure core test. Do not expect same ratio on dayly operations. - David Malone have a really interesting graph that shows impact of cache size and RAM speed over a core-intensive process. It can be found at : http://www.maths.tcd.ie/~dwmalone/comp/perf.ps and shows the L1, L2 and RAM speed and size steps. Speculation: Intel build the same core every time. If the cache runs full speed, it's a Xeon. If only half of the cache runs at full speed, it's a PIII, if a quarter of the cache runs at full speed it's a celeron. If the cache runs at half speed, it's a PII. If nothing works, back to the fundry. Probably exagerated, but it's the basic idea. RN. IeM To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Thu Nov 4 5:47:35 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mel.alcatel.fr (mel.alcatel.fr [212.208.74.132]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B969F1504C for ; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 05:47:30 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from thierry.herbelot@alcatel.fr) Received: from aifhs2.alcatel.fr (mailhub.alcatel.fr [155.132.180.80]) by mel.alcatel.fr (ALCANET/SMTP) with ESMTP id OAA02047; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 14:39:48 +0100 Received: from lune.telspace.alcatel.fr (lune.telspace.alcatel.fr [155.132.144.65]) by aifhs2.alcatel.fr (ALCANET/SMTP2) with ESMTP id OAA19261; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 14:44:36 +0100 (MET) Received: from telss1 (telss1.telspace.alcatel.fr [155.132.51.4]) by lune.telspace.alcatel.fr (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA02616; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 14:40:00 +0100 (MET) Received: from alcatel.fr by telss1 (8.8.8+Sun/SMI-SVR4) id OAA07064; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 14:41:45 +0100 (MET) Message-ID: <38218C67.E1B2E838@alcatel.fr> Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 14:38:47 +0100 From: Thierry Herbelot Reply-To: thierry.herbelot@alcatel.fr Organization: ALCATEL CIT Nanterre X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (WinNT; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: remy@synx.com Cc: Joachim.Strombergson@emw.ericsson.se, freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Good SMP Motherboards References: <199911041204.NAA05362@gw0.boostworks.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Salut, Remy Nonnenmacher wrote: > [COUIC] > - Linear interpolation for a Celeron 500 would lead to 2.80 Mkey/s which > is nearly what gave the PIII. If this is exact, the performance/price > ratio is outstanding. This is exactly what I get with my BP6 and a pair of 333 O'Cd @ 500 MHz, happily crunching for about one month, under the then-Current (the rc5 run was at the beginning just a test to validate the cooling system of the box - I have to find time to try 550 MHz) TfH > - This is a pure core test. Do not expect same ratio on dayly > operations. > - David Malone have a really interesting graph that shows impact of > cache size and RAM speed over a core-intensive process. It can be found > at : http://www.maths.tcd.ie/~dwmalone/comp/perf.ps and shows the L1, > L2 and RAM speed and size steps. > > Speculation: > > Intel build the same core every time. If the cache runs full speed, it's > a Xeon. If only half of the cache runs at full speed, it's a PIII, if a > quarter of the cache runs at full speed it's a celeron. If the cache > runs at half speed, it's a PII. If nothing works, back to the fundry. > > Probably exagerated, but it's the basic idea. > > RN. > IeM > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Thu Nov 4 6:25:23 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from gw0.boostworks.com (gw0.boostworks.com [194.167.81.213]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CFC114C9A for ; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 06:24:46 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from root@synx.com) Received: from synx.com (root@rn.synx.com [192.1.1.241]) by gw0.boostworks.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id PAA06321 for ; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 15:24:38 +0100 (CET) Message-Id: <199911041424.PAA06321@gw0.boostworks.com> Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 15:24:35 +0100 (CET) From: Remy Nonnenmacher Reply-To: remy@synx.com Subject: Piping under SMP To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/plain; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org I observed that piping commands quiet never make use of the full SMP potential. This is probably due to the GL. I would like to know (more for personnal knowledge than to get things done) the difficulties to improve this specific area. Mainly, are we in a all (full granular) of nothing (keep GL) situation ? TIA. RN. IaM To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Thu Nov 4 7:16:52 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mailgate1a.bridge.com (mailgate1a.ext.bridge.com [167.76.159.72]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 443A814C32 for ; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 07:16:48 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mhughes@logroad.bridge.com) Received: by mailgate1a.bridge.com; id IAA11783; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 08:43:15 -0600 (CST) Received: from mail1srv.bridge.com(167.76.56.34) by mailgate1a.bridge.com via smap (V4.2) id xma011369; Thu, 4 Nov 99 08:42:06 -0600 Received: from logroad.bridge.com (logroad.bridge.com [167.76.15.21]) by mail1srv.bridge.com (8.8.8/8.7.3) with SMTP id IAA00570 for ; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 08:43:00 -0600 (CST) Received: by logroad.bridge.com (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id IAA25097; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 08:42:48 -0600 From: mhughes@logroad.bridge.com (Michael Hughes) Message-Id: <199911041442.IAA25097@logroad.bridge.com> Subject: Compaq Proliant 6400R To: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 08:42:48 -0600 (CST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL0] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org I loaded 3.2 on a Compaq Proliant 6400R. It has 4 processors and 2 Gig of memory. I compiled a new kernel and booted the system with it. It came up and told me to add the option line on how many processors. I did this, recompiled the kernel and rebooted. It comes up with the following error messages: panic: bad PCI bus numbering mp_lock:00000001; cpuid=0; lapic.id=03000000 This there something new in 3.3 that will help or has anyone seen this before? Thanks for your help in advance. -- Michael Hughes email:mhughes@bridge.com Bridge Information Systems, Inc. Pager pin:3142245953 St Louis MO Pager email:3142245953@scout.pagemart.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Thu Nov 4 12:30:54 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from cc.weber.edu (cc.weber.edu [137.190.1.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56868156CE for ; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 12:29:09 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rfleming@cc.weber.edu) Received: from cc.weber.edu ([137.190.3.225]) by cc.WEBER.EDU (PMDF V5.1-12 #7039) with ESMTP id <01JHXW91XX688Y8HMS@cc.WEBER.EDU> for freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 13:29:03 MST Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 14:56:48 -0700 From: Robert Fleming Subject: Re: Compaq Proliant 6400R To: Michael Hughes Cc: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Message-id: <38220120.A3FB06B7@cc.weber.edu> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win95; I) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: en References: <199911041442.IAA25097@logroad.bridge.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Michael I think this has a lot to do with the apic setting in the kernel and the configuration of your bios. I had to boot of the compaq cd/floppies and change a couple setting to get it to work correctly. Compaq has an option in the NVRAM that handles the processor id on the bus and the apics differently depending on what os that you specify. I don't remember what combination that I used to get it working. I do know that a changed some setting in the lint kernel for it and adjusted the bios to handle things different. Be sure that you turn on caching if you don't have a pentium pro system or at least be sure that the kernel is recognizing all the ram correctly. I had a problem here to when I tried to get the kernel working a system with 1.0 gig of memory. I hope this helps a little. It's be a year or so since in worked on these machines. Rob Michael Hughes wrote: > I loaded 3.2 on a Compaq Proliant 6400R. It has 4 processors and 2 Gig > of memory. I compiled a new kernel and booted the system with it. It > came up and told me to add the option line on how many processors. I > did this, recompiled the kernel and rebooted. It comes up with the > following error messages: > > panic: bad PCI bus numbering > mp_lock:00000001; cpuid=0; lapic.id=03000000 > > This there something new in 3.3 that will help or has anyone seen this > before? Thanks for your help in advance. > > -- > Michael Hughes email:mhughes@bridge.com > Bridge Information Systems, Inc. Pager pin:3142245953 > St Louis MO Pager email:3142245953@scout.pagemart.net > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Thu Nov 4 14:10:53 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mail.hsonline.net (mail.hsonline.net [205.243.33.25]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFE2215173 for ; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 14:10:37 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from zamy27@hsonline.net) Received: from hsonline.net [208.10.214.102] by mail.hsonline.net with ESMTP (SMTPD32-5.01) id AE5882001EE; Thu, 04 Nov 1999 17:09:44 -0500 Message-ID: <382203FA.4F4740B4@hsonline.net> Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 17:08:59 -0500 From: Scott Myron X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Subject: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Hello. I want to get a Dual celeron going with freebsd as the OS. My question is, do the chips have to have the same stepping? I read somewhere that if the chips do NOT have the same stepping, it screws up, and causes blue screens in NT, and i was wondering if anything similar happens in FreeBSD. I figure it'll be difficult to get 2 celerons with the same stepping. I am just planning on getting 2 retial ppga celeron 433's. I read somewhere else that "it was just a myth and the processors do NOT have to have the same stepping." so i'm just searching for the truth. Thanks. Scott To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Thu Nov 4 15:34:19 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mail.rdc1.ab.home.com (ha1.rdc1.ab.wave.home.com [24.64.2.50]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B22B015022 for ; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 15:34:15 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from vipw@home.com) Received: from fatman ([24.66.193.63]) by mail.rdc1.ab.home.com (InterMail v4.01.01.07 201-229-111-110) with SMTP id <19991104233231.OZBV10032.mail.rdc1.ab.home.com@fatman>; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 15:32:31 -0800 Message-ID: <004501bf271d$09728c20$0564000a@fast.b0rk.net> From: "Adam Serediuk" To: "Scott Myron" Cc: References: <382203FA.4F4740B4@hsonline.net> Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 16:33:45 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Scott, the processors do NOT have to be the same stepping. it's just general practice to match the stepping of the cpu's when possible. I believe this has to do with the possibility of the clock rate varying slightly from stepping to stepping although I am not sure. ----- Original Message ----- From: Scott Myron To: Sent: Thursday, November 04, 1999 3:08 PM Subject: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? > Hello. I want to get a Dual celeron going with freebsd as the OS. My > question is, do the chips have to have the same stepping? I read > somewhere that if the chips do NOT have the same stepping, it screws up, > > and causes blue screens in NT, and i was wondering if anything similar > happens in FreeBSD. I figure it'll be difficult to get 2 celerons with > the same stepping. I am just planning on getting 2 retial ppga celeron > 433's. I read somewhere else that "it was just a myth and the processors > > do NOT have to have the same stepping." so i'm just searching for the > truth. Thanks. > > > Scott > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Thu Nov 4 16: 2:38 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (GndRsh.dnsmgr.net [198.145.92.4]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B2C215222 for ; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 16:02:20 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from freebsd@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net) Received: (from freebsd@localhost) by gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA51143; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 16:01:33 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from freebsd) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" Message-Id: <199911050001.QAA51143@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? In-Reply-To: <004501bf271d$09728c20$0564000a@fast.b0rk.net> from Adam Serediuk at "Nov 4, 1999 04:33:45 pm" To: vipw@home.com (Adam Serediuk) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 16:01:33 -0800 (PST) Cc: zamy27@hsonline.net (Scott Myron), freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL54 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org [Charset iso-8859-1 unsupported, filtering to ASCII...] > Scott, > > the processors do NOT have to be the same stepping. it's just general > practice to match the stepping of the cpu's when possible. I believe this > has to do with the possibility of the clock rate varying slightly from > stepping to stepping although I am not sure. They do not have to be the same stepping, they must be MP comptabile steppings per the Intel Processor Errata Data Sheet. This applies to all Intel MP capible processors, from the P54 (Pentium) to the PIII Xeon. Some combinations work, others do not. Also they _should_ be MP tested chips, which can be determined by the S-spec number and other markings on the chip. On Pentium in is the last letter of the markings like SSS or VSS or VSU, last letter being U means only tested for UP operation, last letter being S means tested for MP operation. Please do not answer questions you do not have the technical expertise to answer completely and correctly, it only leads to confusion. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Scott Myron > To: > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 1999 3:08 PM > Subject: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? > > > > Hello. I want to get a Dual celeron going with freebsd as the OS. My > > question is, do the chips have to have the same stepping? I read > > somewhere that if the chips do NOT have the same stepping, it screws up, > > > > and causes blue screens in NT, and i was wondering if anything similar > > happens in FreeBSD. I figure it'll be difficult to get 2 celerons with > > the same stepping. I am just planning on getting 2 retial ppga celeron > > 433's. I read somewhere else that "it was just a myth and the processors > > > > do NOT have to have the same stepping." so i'm just searching for the > > truth. Thanks. > > > > > > Scott > > > > > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > > with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message > -- Rod Grimes - KD7CAX @ CN85sl - (RWG25) rgrimes@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Thu Nov 4 16: 6: 8 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mail.rdc1.ab.home.com (ha1.rdc1.ab.wave.home.com [24.64.2.50]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35EC4151A3 for ; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 16:05:41 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from vipw@home.com) Received: from fatman ([24.66.193.63]) by mail.rdc1.ab.home.com (InterMail v4.01.01.07 201-229-111-110) with SMTP id <19991105000453.PLXS10032.mail.rdc1.ab.home.com@fatman> for ; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 16:04:53 -0800 Message-ID: <00c101bf2721$8ee77240$0564000a@fast.b0rk.net> From: "Adam Serediuk" To: References: <199911050001.QAA51143@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 17:06:07 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300 Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org He wanted a dual celeron setup, like every other person with a budget. I assumed that he would be planning to use a abit bp6 motherboard and two cpu's of the same speed. please do not attempt to insult my intelligence. this is not a mailing list to slander others, we are here to discuss, help others and seek help ourselves. ----- Original Message ----- From: Rodney W. Grimes To: Adam Serediuk Cc: Scott Myron ; Sent: Thursday, November 04, 1999 5:01 PM Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? > [Charset iso-8859-1 unsupported, filtering to ASCII...] > > Scott, > > > > the processors do NOT have to be the same stepping. it's just general > > practice to match the stepping of the cpu's when possible. I believe this > > has to do with the possibility of the clock rate varying slightly from > > stepping to stepping although I am not sure. > > They do not have to be the same stepping, they must be MP comptabile > steppings per the Intel Processor Errata Data Sheet. This applies > to all Intel MP capible processors, from the P54 (Pentium) to the > PIII Xeon. > > Some combinations work, others do not. > > Also they _should_ be MP tested chips, which can be determined by > the S-spec number and other markings on the chip. On Pentium in > is the last letter of the markings like SSS or VSS or VSU, last > letter being U means only tested for UP operation, last letter > being S means tested for MP operation. > > Please do not answer questions you do not have the technical > expertise to answer completely and correctly, it only leads to > confusion. > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: Scott Myron > > To: > > Sent: Thursday, November 04, 1999 3:08 PM > > Subject: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? > > > > > > > Hello. I want to get a Dual celeron going with freebsd as the OS. My > > > question is, do the chips have to have the same stepping? I read > > > somewhere that if the chips do NOT have the same stepping, it screws up, > > > > > > and causes blue screens in NT, and i was wondering if anything similar > > > happens in FreeBSD. I figure it'll be difficult to get 2 celerons with > > > the same stepping. I am just planning on getting 2 retial ppga celeron > > > 433's. I read somewhere else that "it was just a myth and the processors > > > > > > do NOT have to have the same stepping." so i'm just searching for the > > > truth. Thanks. > > > > > > > > > Scott > > > > > > > > > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > > > with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message > > > > > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > > with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message > > > > > -- > Rod Grimes - KD7CAX @ CN85sl - (RWG25) rgrimes@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Thu Nov 4 16: 8:29 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from dorifer.heim3.tu-clausthal.de (dorifer.heim3.tu-clausthal.de [139.174.243.252]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9DCC815534 for ; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 16:08:16 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from olli@dorifer.heim3.tu-clausthal.de) Received: (from olli@localhost) by dorifer.heim3.tu-clausthal.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) id BAA26180 for freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 01:06:26 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from olli) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 01:06:26 +0100 (CET) From: Oliver Fromme Message-Id: <199911050006.BAA26180@dorifer.heim3.tu-clausthal.de> To: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? Organization: Administration Heim 3 Reply-To: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 RZTUC(3) PL2] Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Scott Myron wrote in list.freebsd-smp: > Hello. I want to get a Dual celeron going with freebsd as the OS. My > question is, do the chips have to have the same stepping? I read > somewhere that if the chips do NOT have the same stepping, it screws up, > > and causes blue screens in NT, and i was wondering if anything similar > happens in FreeBSD. I figure it'll be difficult to get 2 celerons with > the same stepping. I am just planning on getting 2 retial ppga celeron > 433's. I read somewhere else that "it was just a myth and the processors > do NOT have to have the same stepping." so i'm just searching for the > truth. Thanks. I simply ordered two Celeroni (466 MHz) from a reseller (hoping that they would be of same age and stepping), and indeed it turned out that they were the same stepping, and they're working fine since (in a Gigabute GA-6BXD mainboard). So I'd suggest that you simply order two of them, and there will be a good chance that they will be of the same stepping. Regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, Leibnizstr. 18/61, 38678 Clausthal, Germany (Info: finger userinfo:olli@dorifer.heim3.tu-clausthal.de) "In jedem Stück Kohle wartet ein Diamant auf seine Geburt" (Terry Pratchett) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Thu Nov 4 17:47:33 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mail.enteract.com (mail.enteract.com [207.229.143.33]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B689150A9 for ; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 17:47:15 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dscheidt@enteract.com) Received: from shell-2.enteract.com (dscheidt@shell-2.enteract.com [207.229.143.41]) by mail.enteract.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id TAA11546 for ; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 19:47:14 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from dscheidt@enteract.com) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 19:47:14 -0600 (CST) From: David Scheidt To: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? In-Reply-To: <199911050006.BAA26180@dorifer.heim3.tu-clausthal.de> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Fri, 5 Nov 1999, Oliver Fromme wrote: > > So I'd suggest that you simply order two of them, and > there will be a good chance that they will be of the same > stepping. > This usually works. If you have an ongoing relationship with the vendor, you might ask that they supply the same stepping. You can ask anyways, of course, but the more money you spend with them, teh more likely they are to comply. David Scheidt To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Thu Nov 4 18: 4:53 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from atlrel1.hp.com (atlrel1.hp.com [156.153.255.210]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5715E14D6A for ; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 18:04:50 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from darrylo@sr.hp.com) Received: from postal.sr.hp.com (postal.sr.hp.com [15.4.46.173]) by atlrel1.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4566E29C for ; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 21:03:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from mina.sr.hp.com (root@mina.sr.hp.com [15.4.42.247]) by postal.sr.hp.com with ESMTP (8.8.6 (PHNE_17190)/8.7.3 TIS 5.0) id SAA09460 for ; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 18:03:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (darrylo@mina.sr.hp.com [15.4.42.247]) by mina.sr.hp.com with ESMTP (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.7.3 TIS 5.0) id SAA04671 for ; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 18:03:37 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199911050203.SAA04671@mina.sr.hp.com> To: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? Reply-To: Darryl Okahata In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 04 Nov 1999 16:01:33 PST." <199911050001.QAA51143@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.108) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 18:03:36 -0800 From: Darryl Okahata Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org "Rodney W. Grimes" wrote: > They do not have to be the same stepping, they must be MP comptabile > steppings per the Intel Processor Errata Data Sheet. This applies > to all Intel MP capible processors, from the P54 (Pentium) to the > PIII Xeon. > > Some combinations work, others do not. > > Also they _should_ be MP tested chips, which can be determined by > the S-spec number and other markings on the chip. On Pentium in > is the last letter of the markings like SSS or VSS or VSU, last > letter being U means only tested for UP operation, last letter > being S means tested for MP operation. Uh, the posters are talking about *Celerons*. Celerons are not supported for SMP operation, and are probably not even tested for SMP, although many (most? all???) happen to work in an SMP configuration. It's somewhat like overclocking: if it works, great -- if it doesn't, don't expect much support (Intel won't support it, and there's precious little help here). Also, a rumor has been ongoing (for weeks) where, supposedly, Intel is "fixing" the Celeron such that it will no longer operate in SMP mode. These days, I'm not sure dual Celerons make sense. Unless you overclock (which I don't recommend, for all the usual reasons), you're only saving, oh, US$200-$230 compared to a comparable Pentium II-based system. Also, because of the small 128K L2 cache and the 66MHz bus (no overclocking, remember?), dual Celerons aren't as fast as dual P2s. -- Darryl Okahata darrylo@sr.hp.com DISCLAIMER: this message is the author's personal opinion and does not constitute the support, opinion, or policy of Agilent Technologies, or of the little green men that have been following him all day. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Thu Nov 4 18:12:27 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mercury.gfit.net (ns.gfit.net [209.41.124.90]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B44115436 for ; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 18:12:18 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tom@embt.com) Received: from PARANOR (timembt.iinc.com [206.67.169.229]) by mercury.gfit.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id UAA26544 for ; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 20:17:08 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from tom@embt.com) Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19991104211155.0110c588@mail.embt.com> X-Sender: tembt@mail.embt.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 21:11:55 -0500 To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org From: Tom Embt Subject: Re: Good SMP Motherboards In-Reply-To: <199911041204.NAA05362@gw0.boostworks.com> References: <3821378D.D532AB2@emw.ericsson.se> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org >Here is some using the rc5des client software (latest version) : > >Abit BP6 2x466 Celerons, -CURRENT : 2.60 Mkey/s ( 100$/proc) >C440GX+ 2xPIII Xeon 500, -STABLE : 2.73 MKey/s (10000$/proc) >L440GX+ 2xPIII 500 , -CURRENT : 2.82 Mkey/s ( 260$/proc) > >No overclocking. The C and L 440 are pure Intel boxed rack servers >(SC440 and LB440GX). All Mobos uses ECC-SDRAM, no EDO. > [...] FWIW: Abit BP6 2x540MHz Celeron (98MHz FSB) -CURRENT : 3.02 Mkeys/s ($80/proc SL36C + $20/ea fans/heatsink and some TLC) Of course RC5DES is not exactly a real world benchmark... Tom Embt tom@embt.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Thu Nov 4 18:12:32 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from cain.gsoft.com.au (genesi.lnk.telstra.net [139.130.136.161]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 035C715693 for ; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 18:12:18 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from doconnor@gsoft.com.au) Received: from cain.gsoft.com.au (doconnor@cain [203.38.152.97]) by cain.gsoft.com.au (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id MAA23702; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 12:39:32 +1030 (CST) (envelope-from doconnor@gsoft.com.au) Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.3.1 [p0] on FreeBSD X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <199911050203.SAA04671@mina.sr.hp.com> Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 12:39:32 +1030 (CST) From: "Daniel O'Connor" To: Darryl Okahata Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? Cc: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On 05-Nov-99 Darryl Okahata wrote: > These days, I'm not sure dual Celerons make sense. Unless you > overclock (which I don't recommend, for all the usual reasons), you're > only saving, oh, US$200-$230 compared to a comparable Pentium II-based > system. Also, because of the small 128K L2 cache and the 66MHz bus (no > overclocking, remember?), dual Celerons aren't as fast as dual P2s. *Only* US$200-$300? Sure the cache thing sucks ass, but if you are building a workstation on the cheap then they're ideal.. I personally wouldn't mind saving US$250 :) --- Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au "The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from." -- Andrew Tanenbaum To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Thu Nov 4 18:30:35 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mercury.gfit.net (ns.gfit.net [209.41.124.90]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 361691580E for ; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 18:30:28 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from tom@embt.com) Received: from PARANOR (timembt.iinc.com [206.67.169.229]) by mercury.gfit.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id UAA27333; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 20:34:56 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from tom@embt.com) Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19991104212943.0110c588@mail.embt.com> X-Sender: tembt@mail.embt.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.3 (32) Date: Thu, 04 Nov 1999 21:29:43 -0500 To: Scott Myron From: Tom Embt Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? Cc: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <382203FA.4F4740B4@hsonline.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org At 17:08 11/04/1999 -0500, you wrote: >Hello. I want to get a Dual celeron going with freebsd as the OS. My >question is, do the chips have to have the same stepping? I read >somewhere that if the chips do NOT have the same stepping, it screws up, > >and causes blue screens in NT, and i was wondering if anything similar >happens in FreeBSD. I figure it'll be difficult to get 2 celerons with >the same stepping. I am just planning on getting 2 retial ppga celeron >433's. I read somewhere else that "it was just a myth and the processors > >do NOT have to have the same stepping." so i'm just searching for the >truth. Thanks. > > >Scott I will take a chance here and say, against the many people who have said otherwise, that getting the same stepping is important. Different steppings can (AFAIK) use different microcode, and a mix'n'match approach could cause some very hard to track down errors when the CPUs don't communicate properly. I'm no expert on the subject, that's just my opinion. It might "mostly" work, but what good is that? The good news is that you will almost certainly get two Celerons of the same stepping. I *think* all currently manufactured Celerons are of Id 0x665 (stepping 5). Also, all current Celerons are MP-capable, unlike the Pentium days when you had to look for an "SSS" CPU. Any two new Celeries of the same speed are pretty much guaranteed to do SMP together. In short: I don't think it's a myth, it's just not something to worry about in your particular situation. Disclaimer: Of course, I may be talking out of my ***. Tom Embt ICQ UIN: 11245398 tom@embt.com d:-)> ------------------------------------------------------------------ "You're one of those condescending Unix computer users!" "Here's a nickel, kid. Get yourself a better computer" - Dilbert. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Thu Nov 4 18:36:53 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from megadodo.segNET.COM (megadodo.segNET.COM [206.34.181.3]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39B3E15817 for ; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 18:36:49 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from adams@digitalspark.net) Received: from nightfall.digitalspark.net (arc2a119.bf.sover.net [209.198.82.121]) by megadodo.segNET.COM (8.9.1a/8.8.5) with ESMTP id VAA22532; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 21:26:34 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 21:26:34 +0000 (GMT) From: Adam Strohl To: "Daniel O'Connor" Cc: Darryl Okahata , freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org In the real world the 1/2 the cache at 2x the speed makes all of JACK in performance difference from the "real" PIIs. It rocks. - ----( Adam Strohl )------------------------------------------------ - - UNIX Operations/Systems http://www.digitalspark.net - - adams (at) digitalspark.net xxx.xxx.xxxx xxxxx - - ----------------------------------------( DigitalSpark.NET )------- - On Fri, 5 Nov 1999, Daniel O'Connor wrote: > > On 05-Nov-99 Darryl Okahata wrote: > > These days, I'm not sure dual Celerons make sense. Unless you > > overclock (which I don't recommend, for all the usual reasons), you're > > only saving, oh, US$200-$230 compared to a comparable Pentium II-based > > system. Also, because of the small 128K L2 cache and the 66MHz bus (no > > overclocking, remember?), dual Celerons aren't as fast as dual P2s. > > *Only* US$200-$300? > > Sure the cache thing sucks ass, but if you are building a workstation on the > cheap then they're ideal.. > > I personally wouldn't mind saving US$250 :) > > --- > Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer > for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au > "The nice thing about standards is that there > are so many of them to choose from." > -- Andrew Tanenbaum > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Thu Nov 4 20:27:31 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mail.enteract.com (mail.enteract.com [207.229.143.33]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C2941567E for ; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 20:27:29 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dscheidt@enteract.com) Received: from shell-2.enteract.com (dscheidt@shell-2.enteract.com [207.229.143.41]) by mail.enteract.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id WAA25478; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 22:23:11 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from dscheidt@enteract.com) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 22:23:11 -0600 (CST) From: David Scheidt To: Adam Strohl Cc: "Daniel O'Connor" , Darryl Okahata , freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Thu, 4 Nov 1999, Adam Strohl wrote: > > In the real world the 1/2 the cache at 2x the speed makes all of JACK > in performance difference from the "real" PIIs. It rocks. It depends very much on what the load on the box is. I have a dual PII/400 box at home, which doesn't get beat on too hard most of the time. I put a pair Celeron 400s in for a week, and couldn't subjectively tell the difference. My Seti@home rate on the box went down ~10%, and my buildworld times went up a couple minutes, but for the sort interactive use I do, which isn't CPU bound in the general case, there was no difference. For workstations, dual Celery are good, cheap way of buying some extra oomph. For a production server applictation, I wouldn't think about it. David Scheidt To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Thu Nov 4 23:21: 8 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mgo.iij.ad.jp (mgo.iij.ad.jp [202.232.15.6]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A961158C5 for ; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 23:20:38 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from shigeru@iij.ad.jp) Received: from ns.iij.ad.jp (root@ns.iij.ad.jp [192.168.2.8]) by mgo.iij.ad.jp (8.8.8/MGO1.0) with ESMTP id QAA16733; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 16:20:23 +0900 (JST) Received: from fs.iij.ad.jp (root@fs.iij.ad.jp [192.168.2.9]) by ns.iij.ad.jp (8.8.5/3.5Wpl7) with ESMTP id QAA01529; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 16:20:23 +0900 (JST) Received: from mercury.iij.ad.jp (root@mercury.iij.ad.jp [192.168.4.89]) by fs.iij.ad.jp (8.8.5/3.5Wpl7) with ESMTP id QAA18401; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 16:20:22 +0900 (JST) Received: from localhost (shigeru@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mercury.iij.ad.jp (8.8.5/3.5W) with ESMTP id QAA05511; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 16:20:21 +0900 (JST) To: mhughes@logroad.bridge.com Cc: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Compaq Proliant 6400R In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 4 Nov 1999 08:42:48 -0600 (CST)" <199911041442.IAA25097@logroad.bridge.com> References: <199911041442.IAA25097@logroad.bridge.com> X-Mailer: Mew version 1.93b38 on XEmacs 21.2 (Aeolus) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <19991105162020R.shigeru@iij.ad.jp> Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 16:20:20 +0900 From: YAMAMOTO Shigeru X-Dispatcher: imput version 980522 Lines: 25 Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org >>>>> "Michael" == Michael Hughes writes: Michael> I loaded 3.2 on a Compaq Proliant 6400R. It has 4 processors and Michael> 2 Gig of memory. I tested Compaq Proliant 6400R, 2 processors and 2G memory. At first, I installed 3.3 Release, but I have a same trouble. Second, I installed 3.3-19991031-STABLE, but I could not resolve that trouble. At last, I installed 4.0-19991024-CURRENT and I win! Currently I have no trouble except to use a dual ethernet PCI borad. #I avoid this problem to change to a master PCI slot. @src/sys/i386/isa/picbus.c was fixed to support 450NX at revison 1.43. But 3.3-RELEASE and 3.3-STABLE are using older than 1.43. Does anyone have a success to install 3.3-RELEASE or 3.3-STABLE? Thanks, ------- YAMAMOTO Shigeru Internet Initiative Japan Inc. Network Engineering Div. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Thu Nov 4 23:38: 6 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from penguin.wise.edt.ericsson.se (penguin-ext.wise.edt.ericsson.se [194.237.142.110]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C1C214D23 for ; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 23:38:01 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from Joachim.Strombergson@emw.ericsson.se) Received: from poem.emw.ericsson.se (poem.emw.ericsson.se [136.225.49.25]) by penguin.wise.edt.ericsson.se (8.9.3/8.9.3/WIREfire-1.5) with ESMTP id IAA18266 for ; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 08:38:01 +0100 (MET) Received: from emw.ericsson.se (balvenie.mo.emw.ericsson.se [136.225.229.97]) by poem.emw.ericsson.se (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA26089 for ; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 08:37:56 +0100 (MET) Message-ID: <38228954.F9B16724@emw.ericsson.se> Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 08:37:56 +0100 From: Joachim Strombergson Organization: Ericsson Microwave Systems AB X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7C-EMW [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.5.1 sun4u) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-smp Subject: WINE and Star Office in FreeBSD SMP -STABLE? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Hi! As the subject suggest, could anyone tell me if WINE and/or Star Office works on FreeBSD STABLE running in SMP-mode? I have thought about going to CURRENT, but am a bit concerned about being able to get the sucker running again if the system would turn out to be built on one of the few temporarily bad snapshots. -- Med vänlig hälsning, Yours Joachim Strömbergson - Alltid i harmonisk svängning ---------------- Ericsson Microwave Systems AB ----------------- Joachim Strömbergson http://www.ericsson.se/microwave ASIC System on Silicon engineer, nice to CUTE animals. * Opinions above, expressed or implicit, are strictly personal * ------------- Spamfodder: regeringen@regeringen.se ------------- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Thu Nov 4 23:43:23 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from penguin.wise.edt.ericsson.se (penguin-ext.wise.edt.ericsson.se [194.237.142.110]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 252F715868 for ; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 23:43:20 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from Joachim.Strombergson@emw.ericsson.se) Received: from poem.emw.ericsson.se (poem.emw.ericsson.se [136.225.49.25]) by penguin.wise.edt.ericsson.se (8.9.3/8.9.3/WIREfire-1.5) with ESMTP id IAA21228 for ; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 08:43:17 +0100 (MET) Received: from emw.ericsson.se (balvenie.mo.emw.ericsson.se [136.225.229.97]) by poem.emw.ericsson.se (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA26343 for ; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 08:43:12 +0100 (MET) Message-ID: <38228A90.B00F2E8C@emw.ericsson.se> Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 08:43:12 +0100 From: Joachim Strombergson Organization: Ericsson Microwave Systems AB X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7C-EMW [en] (X11; I; SunOS 5.5.1 sun4u) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freebsd-smp Subject: Affinity Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Hi! I've missed the message boats a few times so... Could anyone explain the affinity thing again. If I understood it correctly, it's used to lock a process to a certain CPU. When running say a SETI@Home and some other apps at the same time, and then check top, I see a behaviour for the SETI process where the status goes something like: CPU0->RUN->CPU1->RUN->CPU0.... Does that mean that the process is bouncing back and forth between the CPUs? Any help and explanations would be very much appreciated. BTW: I'm running a Dual Celeron on ABIT BP6 machine with FreeBSD 3.3 STABLE. -- Med vänlig hälsning, Yours Joachim Strömbergson - Alltid i harmonisk svängning ---------------- Ericsson Microwave Systems AB ----------------- Joachim Strömbergson http://www.ericsson.se/microwave ASIC System on Silicon engineer, nice to CUTE animals. * Opinions above, expressed or implicit, are strictly personal * ------------- Spamfodder: regeringen@regeringen.se ------------- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Thu Nov 4 23:57:44 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (GndRsh.dnsmgr.net [198.145.92.4]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A421614CEE for ; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 23:57:41 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from freebsd@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net) Received: (from freebsd@localhost) by gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id XAA52784; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 23:54:23 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from freebsd) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" Message-Id: <199911050754.XAA52784@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? In-Reply-To: from Adam Strohl at "Nov 4, 1999 09:26:34 pm" To: adams@digitalspark.net (Adam Strohl) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 23:54:22 -0800 (PST) Cc: doconnor@gsoft.com.au (Daniel O'Connor), darrylo@sr.hp.com (Darryl Okahata), freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL54 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > In the real world the 1/2 the cache at 2x the speed makes all of JACK > in performance difference from the "real" PIIs. It rocks. I have to agree with this. And given we are in the business of building SMP servers I have had plenty of first hand experience. I had pretty much ignored the Celeron until the PPGA370 version with slot-1 adapters made it real easy for me to play with a few of them on the cheap in some of the normally P3-450 to P3-600 based servers we turn out, and guess what I found out... it's pretty darn hard to measure much of any difference in any real world applications. Sure synthetic benchmarks can show a difference, but ``make world'' couldn't tell me if I had dual P3-400's or Cereron PPGA-370-400s. I liked it so much my main work box is now slated for a ``on the cheap Dual Celeron upgrade''. Ohhh.. and K7's rock socks!! Our retail computer store front's clone o magic K7/500 128MB with 5400rpm IDE disk drives was only 2 minutes behind an AAI P3-450 512MB 7200rpm SCSI system on make world. Now to go swap the scsi systems around and see who wins :-) > > - ----( Adam Strohl )------------------------------------------------ - > - UNIX Operations/Systems http://www.digitalspark.net - > - adams (at) digitalspark.net xxx.xxx.xxxx xxxxx - > - ----------------------------------------( DigitalSpark.NET )------- - > > On Fri, 5 Nov 1999, Daniel O'Connor wrote: > > > > > On 05-Nov-99 Darryl Okahata wrote: > > > These days, I'm not sure dual Celerons make sense. Unless you > > > overclock (which I don't recommend, for all the usual reasons), you're > > > only saving, oh, US$200-$230 compared to a comparable Pentium II-based > > > system. Also, because of the small 128K L2 cache and the 66MHz bus (no > > > overclocking, remember?), dual Celerons aren't as fast as dual P2s. > > > > *Only* US$200-$300? > > > > Sure the cache thing sucks ass, but if you are building a workstation on the > > cheap then they're ideal.. > > > > I personally wouldn't mind saving US$250 :) > > > > --- > > Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer > > for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au > > "The nice thing about standards is that there > > are so many of them to choose from." > > -- Andrew Tanenbaum > > > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > > with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message > > > > > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message > -- Rod Grimes - KD7CAX @ CN85sl - (RWG25) rgrimes@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Fri Nov 5 0: 3:25 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (GndRsh.dnsmgr.net [198.145.92.4]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8107D14CEE for ; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 00:03:21 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from freebsd@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net) Received: (from freebsd@localhost) by gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id XAA52797; Thu, 4 Nov 1999 23:59:55 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from freebsd) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" Message-Id: <199911050759.XAA52797@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? In-Reply-To: <199911050203.SAA04671@mina.sr.hp.com> from Darryl Okahata at "Nov 4, 1999 06:03:36 pm" To: darrylo@sr.hp.com (Darryl Okahata) Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 23:59:54 -0800 (PST) Cc: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL54 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > "Rodney W. Grimes" wrote: > > > They do not have to be the same stepping, they must be MP comptabile > > steppings per the Intel Processor Errata Data Sheet. This applies > > to all Intel MP capible processors, from the P54 (Pentium) to the > > PIII Xeon. > > > > Some combinations work, others do not. > > > > Also they _should_ be MP tested chips, which can be determined by > > the S-spec number and other markings on the chip. On Pentium in > > is the last letter of the markings like SSS or VSS or VSU, last > > letter being U means only tested for UP operation, last letter > > being S means tested for MP operation. > > Uh, the posters are talking about *Celerons*. > > Celerons are not supported for SMP operation, and are probably not > even tested for SMP, although many (most? all???) happen to work in an > SMP configuration. It's somewhat like overclocking: if it works, great -- > if it doesn't, don't expect much support (Intel won't support it, and > there's precious little help here). Celeron smeleron :-). They have S-Specs, they are cut from the same waffers, ever wonder why you can find a Celeron 400 PPGA with the same S-Spec number as a P3 450 except the last digit was changed to ``X'' or some such. Well... guess what... the 256K cache on that die was half bad, got programmed to disabled on the chip went in a PPGA package instead of a SSEC. > Also, a rumor has been ongoing (for weeks) where, supposedly, Intel > is "fixing" the Celeron such that it will no longer operate in SMP mode. Yeppp.... and I know just how they can do it... a small mask change to add a program pad a smack off goes the APIC portion of the die... no more SMP without an APIC :-(. > These days, I'm not sure dual Celerons make sense. Unless you > overclock (which I don't recommend, for all the usual reasons), you're > only saving, oh, US$200-$230 compared to a comparable Pentium II-based > system. Also, because of the small 128K L2 cache and the 66MHz bus (no > overclocking, remember?), dual Celerons aren't as fast as dual P2s. See other posting on this... real world can;t tell between 128K L2 and 256K L2. The 66 vs 100Mhz bus can make a difference, but were doing all our Celeron stuff in PPGA370 with slot/1 adapters and running the bus at 100Mhz so we are technically overclocking the FSB, but leaving the core at normal speed, and thus didn't take that into factor when doing our tests. -- Rod Grimes - KD7CAX @ CN85sl - (RWG25) rgrimes@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Fri Nov 5 0:15: 6 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from venus.GAIANET.NET (venus.GAIANET.NET [207.211.200.51]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B072156D7 for ; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 00:15:03 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from vince@venus.GAIANET.NET) Received: from localhost (vince@localhost) by venus.GAIANET.NET (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA56334; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 00:11:08 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from vince@venus.GAIANET.NET) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 00:11:08 -0800 (PST) From: Vincent Poy To: "Rodney W. Grimes" Cc: Adam Strohl , "Daniel O'Connor" , Darryl Okahata , freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? In-Reply-To: <199911050754.XAA52784@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Thu, 4 Nov 1999, Rodney W. Grimes wrote: Speaking about Celerons, even though this has nothing to do with SMP. What level of performance should one expect out of a Celeron 266 Slot 1 which has no cache at all. It seems that with that CPU, the system would freeze for a short while every once in awhile while in the shell or in a application like pine, is this normal? Cheers, Vince - vince@MCESTATE.COM - vince@GAIANET.NET ________ __ ____ Unix Networking Operations - FreeBSD-Real Unix for Free / / / / | / |[__ ] GaiaNet Corporation - M & C Estate / / / / | / | __] ] Beverly Hills, California USA 90210 / / / / / |/ / | __] ] HongKong Stars/Gravis UltraSound Mailing Lists Admin /_/_/_/_/|___/|_|[____] > > In the real world the 1/2 the cache at 2x the speed makes all of JACK > > in performance difference from the "real" PIIs. It rocks. > > I have to agree with this. And given we are in the business of building > SMP servers I have had plenty of first hand experience. I had pretty > much ignored the Celeron until the PPGA370 version with slot-1 adapters > made it real easy for me to play with a few of them on the cheap in > some of the normally P3-450 to P3-600 based servers we turn out, and > guess what I found out... it's pretty darn hard to measure much of > any difference in any real world applications. > > Sure synthetic benchmarks can show a difference, but ``make world'' couldn't > tell me if I had dual P3-400's or Cereron PPGA-370-400s. I liked it so > much my main work box is now slated for a ``on the cheap Dual Celeron > upgrade''. > > Ohhh.. and K7's rock socks!! Our retail computer store front's clone > o magic K7/500 128MB with 5400rpm IDE disk drives was only 2 minutes > behind an AAI P3-450 512MB 7200rpm SCSI system on make world. Now to > go swap the scsi systems around and see who wins :-) > > > > > - ----( Adam Strohl )------------------------------------------------ - > > - UNIX Operations/Systems http://www.digitalspark.net - > > - adams (at) digitalspark.net xxx.xxx.xxxx xxxxx - > > - ----------------------------------------( DigitalSpark.NET )------- - > > > > On Fri, 5 Nov 1999, Daniel O'Connor wrote: > > > > > > > > On 05-Nov-99 Darryl Okahata wrote: > > > > These days, I'm not sure dual Celerons make sense. Unless you > > > > overclock (which I don't recommend, for all the usual reasons), you're > > > > only saving, oh, US$200-$230 compared to a comparable Pentium II-based > > > > system. Also, because of the small 128K L2 cache and the 66MHz bus (no > > > > overclocking, remember?), dual Celerons aren't as fast as dual P2s. > > > > > > *Only* US$200-$300? > > > > > > Sure the cache thing sucks ass, but if you are building a workstation on the > > > cheap then they're ideal.. > > > > > > I personally wouldn't mind saving US$250 :) > > > > > > --- > > > Daniel O'Connor software and network engineer > > > for Genesis Software - http://www.gsoft.com.au > > > "The nice thing about standards is that there > > > are so many of them to choose from." > > > -- Andrew Tanenbaum > > > > > > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > > > with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > > with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message > > > > > -- > Rod Grimes - KD7CAX @ CN85sl - (RWG25) rgrimes@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Fri Nov 5 0:47:31 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mail.enteract.com (mail.enteract.com [207.229.143.33]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7055414FA2 for ; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 00:47:29 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dscheidt@enteract.com) Received: from shell-2.enteract.com (dscheidt@shell-2.enteract.com [207.229.143.41]) by mail.enteract.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id CAA44798; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 02:47:07 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from dscheidt@enteract.com) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 02:47:07 -0600 (CST) From: David Scheidt To: Joachim Strombergson Cc: freebsd-smp Subject: Re: Affinity In-Reply-To: <38228A90.B00F2E8C@emw.ericsson.se> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Fri, 5 Nov 1999, Joachim Strombergson wrote: > Hi! > > I've missed the message boats a few times so... Could anyone explain the > affinity thing again. If I understood it correctly, it's used to lock a > process to a certain CPU. More or less right. Processor affinity needn't be implmented such that a process only runs on a certain CPU, it can also just make it more likely that it runs on that CPU. How much of a win it is depends on a number of factors, like what the job is, how big its primary data and code sets are, and the cache coherency model of the machine is. David Scheidt To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Fri Nov 5 2:48:31 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from inep.net (DIPT-gw.inep.net [194.44.99.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB52114D98 for ; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 02:48:25 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from geka@inep.net) Received: (from geka@localhost) by inep.net (8.9.2/8.9.2) id MAA23812 for freebsd-smp@freebsd.org; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 12:46:58 +0200 (EET) From: "Eugene N. Drachenko" Message-Id: <199911051046.MAA23812@inep.net> Subject: GA-586DX To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 12:46:58 +0200 (EET) Organization: iNEP X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL43 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Hi! I have motherboard GA-586DX with 2 Intel Pentium-150 (boxed). What value in kernel configuration file I must set for: NBUS NAPIC NINTR Thanks. -- Eugene N. Drachenko To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Fri Nov 5 4: 7:30 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from overcee.netplex.com.au (overcee.netplex.com.au [202.12.86.7]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5653414CC2 for ; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 04:07:22 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from peter@netplex.com.au) Received: from netplex.com.au (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by overcee.netplex.com.au (Postfix) with ESMTP id B42C61C03; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 20:06:24 +0800 (WST) (envelope-from peter@netplex.com.au) X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 2/24/98 To: Joachim Strombergson Cc: freebsd-smp Subject: Re: Affinity In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 05 Nov 1999 08:43:12 +0100." <38228A90.B00F2E8C@emw.ericsson.se> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 20:06:24 +0800 From: Peter Wemm Message-Id: <19991105120624.B42C61C03@overcee.netplex.com.au> Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Joachim Strombergson wrote: > Hi! > > I've missed the message boats a few times so... Could anyone explain the > affinity thing again. If I understood it correctly, it's used to lock a > process to a certain CPU. > > When running say a SETI@Home and some other apps at the same time, and > then check top, I see a behaviour for the SETI process where the status > goes something like: CPU0->RUN->CPU1->RUN->CPU0.... Does that mean that > the process is bouncing back and forth between the CPUs? > > Any help and explanations would be very much appreciated. > > BTW: I'm running a Dual Celeron on ABIT BP6 machine with FreeBSD 3.3 > STABLE. 4.0 has some simple affinity tweaks that should help with this type of problem. It seems to help with rc564. Cheers, -Peter To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Fri Nov 5 7:50:46 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from houston.matchlogic.com (houston.matchlogic.com [205.216.147.127]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F09CB15276 for ; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 07:50:43 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from crandall@matchlogic.com) Received: by houston.matchlogic.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) id <43SC8JJM>; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 08:50:26 -0700 Message-ID: <64003B21ECCAD11185C500805F31EC0304621AE7@houston.matchlogic.com> From: Charles Randall To: Peter Wemm , Joachim Strombergson Cc: freebsd-smp Subject: RE: Affinity Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 08:50:23 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org From: Peter Wemm [mailto:peter@netplex.com.au] >4.0 has some simple affinity tweaks that should help with this type of >problem. It seems to help with rc564. Any chance those will be back-ported to -stable? Charles To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Fri Nov 5 8:48: 3 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from horst.bfd.com (horst.bfd.com [12.9.219.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84EC114C84 for ; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 08:47:59 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from ejs@bfd.com) Received: from HARLIE.bfd.com (bastion.bfd.com [12.9.219.14]) by horst.bfd.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA25522; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 08:45:04 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from ejs@bfd.com) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 08:45:04 -0800 (PST) From: "Eric J. Schwertfeger" To: Adam Strohl Cc: "Daniel O'Connor" , Darryl Okahata , freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Thu, 4 Nov 1999, Adam Strohl wrote: > In the real world the 1/2 the cache at 2x the speed makes all of JACK > in performance difference from the "real" PIIs. It rocks. I agree for the most part, on single-processor machines, though it's actually a quarter the cache. The reduced, faster cache causes a single celeron to be more memory-bandwidth sensitive. An SMP machine, however, has two CPUs contending for the same bandwidth, and for some processes, that can be fatal. I've done make buildworld's on both my dual Celeron and my dual PPro (the ones with 512K cache). The difference between single and dual celeron is minimal, about 10%. On the dual PPro machine, the speed improvement, using the same disk subsystem, was 80%. Yes, on processes that aren't memory intensive, dual Celerons rock. In fact, on most things, I see closer to 40-50% improvement with dual Celerons, the make buildworld is rather memory intensive. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Fri Nov 5 10:11:40 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from palrel1.hp.com (palrel1.hp.com [156.153.255.242]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41C6914C36 for ; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 10:11:34 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from darrylo@sr.hp.com) Received: from postal.sr.hp.com (postal.sr.hp.com [15.4.46.173]) by palrel1.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5294012D; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 10:09:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from mina.sr.hp.com (root@mina.sr.hp.com [15.4.42.247]) by postal.sr.hp.com with ESMTP (8.8.6 (PHNE_17190)/8.7.3 TIS 5.0) id KAA12942; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 10:09:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (darrylo@mina.sr.hp.com [15.4.42.247]) by mina.sr.hp.com with ESMTP (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.7.3 TIS 5.0) id KAA25476; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 10:09:47 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199911051809.KAA25476@mina.sr.hp.com> To: "Rodney W. Grimes" Cc: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? Reply-To: Darryl Okahata In-reply-to: Your message of "Thu, 04 Nov 1999 23:59:54 PST." <199911050759.XAA52797@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.108) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 10:09:46 -0800 From: Darryl Okahata Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org "Rodney W. Grimes" wrote: > > These days, I'm not sure dual Celerons make sense. Unless you > > overclock (which I don't recommend, for all the usual reasons), you're > > only saving, oh, US$200-$230 compared to a comparable Pentium II-based > > system. Also, because of the small 128K L2 cache and the 66MHz bus (no > > overclocking, remember?), dual Celerons aren't as fast as dual P2s. > > See other posting on this... real world can;t tell between 128K L2 and > 256K L2. The 66 vs 100Mhz bus can make a difference, but were doing > all our Celeron stuff in PPGA370 with slot/1 adapters and running > the bus at 100Mhz so we are technically overclocking the FSB, but > leaving the core at normal speed, and thus didn't take that into > factor when doing our tests. Huh? All Celerons are multiplier-locked. How are you able to decouple the FSB from the core? Don't get me wrong: I'm not against the idea of dual Celerons (my home system is a dual C400 using slot-1 adapters), but, if you really *need* SMP (as opposed to just playing with it), you're generally better off with P2s or above. The 100MHz FSB and the larger (but slower) L2 cache of P2s and above will give you slightly better performance (unless you overclock), *ASSUMING* that you have some application that actually takes full advantage of SMP and utilizes all processors simultaneously. For casual use, where all SMP processors aren't fully utilized, dual Celerons may make sense. However, if you really, really need SMP, you're best off not using dual Celerons, unless you're on a really tight budget. -- Darryl Okahata darrylo@sr.hp.com DISCLAIMER: this message is the author's personal opinion and does not constitute the support, opinion, or policy of Agilent Technologies, or of the little green men that have been following him all day. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Fri Nov 5 10:23:52 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from palrel3.hp.com (palrel3.hp.com [156.153.255.226]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0D251522A for ; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 10:23:44 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from darrylo@sr.hp.com) Received: from postal.sr.hp.com (root@postal.sr.hp.com [15.4.46.173]) by palrel3.hp.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.8.5tis) with ESMTP id KAA18386; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 10:22:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from mina.sr.hp.com (root@mina.sr.hp.com [15.4.42.247]) by postal.sr.hp.com with ESMTP (8.8.6 (PHNE_17190)/8.7.3 TIS 5.0) id KAA14230; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 10:22:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (darrylo@mina.sr.hp.com [15.4.42.247]) by mina.sr.hp.com with ESMTP (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.7.3 TIS 5.0) id KAA25575; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 10:22:09 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199911051822.KAA25575@mina.sr.hp.com> To: "Eric J. Schwertfeger" Cc: Adam Strohl , "Daniel O'Connor" , freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? Reply-To: Darryl Okahata In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 05 Nov 1999 08:45:04 PST." Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.108) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 10:22:08 -0800 From: Darryl Okahata Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org "Eric J. Schwertfeger" wrote: > I agree for the most part, on single-processor machines, though it's > actually a quarter the cache. The reduced, faster cache causes a single > celeron to be more memory-bandwidth sensitive. An SMP machine, however, > has two CPUs contending for the same bandwidth, and for some processes, > that can be fatal. I'd like to emphasize Eric's point. With SMP, memory bandwidth and contention are very important: * A non-overclocked Celeron has a FSB of 66MHz. P2s (350MHz+) and above have a 100MHz FSB. * Celerons have only 128K L2 cache, although it is zero-wait state. With SMP, you can have processes that cause lots of memory contention (e.g., simple calls like "bzero()", "memcpy()", etc, can blow away the cache contents, and force the CPU to go directly to main memory). A larger cache helps to prevent memory contention between CPUs (although the non-zero-wait-state nature makes it less useful). > I've done make buildworld's on both my dual Celeron and my dual PPro (the > ones with 512K cache). The difference between single and dual celeron is > minimal, about 10%. On the dual PPro machine, the speed improvement, > using the same disk subsystem, was 80%. Yes, on processes that aren't > memory intensive, dual Celerons rock. In fact, on most things, I see > closer to 40-50% improvement with dual Celerons, the make buildworld is > rather memory intensive. The numbers I've seen thrown around (and I haven't verified them) are: 2 Celerons -> ~1.5X a single CPU 2 P2s (350MHz+) -> ~1.8X a single CPU This is, of course, simplistic. -- Darryl Okahata darrylo@sr.hp.com DISCLAIMER: this message is the author's personal opinion and does not constitute the support, opinion, or policy of Agilent Technologies, or of the little green men that have been following him all day. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Fri Nov 5 10:32:31 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (GndRsh.dnsmgr.net [198.145.92.4]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CEF31522A for ; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 10:32:26 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from freebsd@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net) Received: (from freebsd@localhost) by gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA57885; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 10:29:27 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from freebsd) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" Message-Id: <199911051829.KAA57885@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? In-Reply-To: from "Eric J. Schwertfeger" at "Nov 5, 1999 08:45:04 am" To: ejs@bfd.com (Eric J. Schwertfeger) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 10:29:27 -0800 (PST) Cc: adams@digitalspark.net (Adam Strohl), doconnor@gsoft.com.au (Daniel O'Connor), darrylo@sr.hp.com (Darryl Okahata), freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL54 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > On Thu, 4 Nov 1999, Adam Strohl wrote: > > > In the real world the 1/2 the cache at 2x the speed makes all of JACK > > in performance difference from the "real" PIIs. It rocks. > > I agree for the most part, on single-processor machines, though it's > actually a quarter the cache. The reduced, faster cache causes a single > celeron to be more memory-bandwidth sensitive. An SMP machine, however, > has two CPUs contending for the same bandwidth, and for some processes, > that can be fatal. > > I've done make buildworld's on both my dual Celeron and my dual PPro (the > ones with 512K cache). The difference between single and dual celeron is > minimal, about 10%. On the dual PPro machine, the speed improvement, > using the same disk subsystem, was 80%. Yes, on processes that aren't > memory intensive, dual Celerons rock. In fact, on most things, I see > closer to 40-50% improvement with dual Celerons, the make buildworld is > rather memory intensive. Actually make buildworld is disk intensive... SMP plain out does not seem to help it much, unless of course you run a non-standard make world with -pipe, which then does make the memory bandwidth demand higher, and if both sides of the pipe just happen to get split accross 2 processors it causes the small cache to be ineffective and the memory system to be a major stall point. Raid 1 (mirroring) with 3 disk drives tends to help it more than anything... single or dual processor. Or properly splitting /usr/src, /usr/obj and ${DESTDIR} to 3 spindles does wonders on any type of cpu, even an old Pentium 100 sees a big improvement... -- Rod Grimes - KD7CAX @ CN85sl - (RWG25) rgrimes@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Fri Nov 5 10:50:13 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (GndRsh.dnsmgr.net [198.145.92.4]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6231B14C84 for ; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 10:50:08 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from freebsd@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net) Received: (from freebsd@localhost) by gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA57925; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 10:46:25 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from freebsd) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" Message-Id: <199911051846.KAA57925@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? In-Reply-To: <199911051809.KAA25476@mina.sr.hp.com> from Darryl Okahata at "Nov 5, 1999 10:09:46 am" To: darrylo@sr.hp.com (Darryl Okahata) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 10:46:25 -0800 (PST) Cc: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL54 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > "Rodney W. Grimes" wrote: > > > > These days, I'm not sure dual Celerons make sense. Unless you > > > overclock (which I don't recommend, for all the usual reasons), you're > > > only saving, oh, US$200-$230 compared to a comparable Pentium II-based > > > system. Also, because of the small 128K L2 cache and the 66MHz bus (no > > > overclocking, remember?), dual Celerons aren't as fast as dual P2s. > > > > See other posting on this... real world can;t tell between 128K L2 and > > 256K L2. The 66 vs 100Mhz bus can make a difference, but were doing > > all our Celeron stuff in PPGA370 with slot/1 adapters and running > > the bus at 100Mhz so we are technically overclocking the FSB, but > > leaving the core at normal speed, and thus didn't take that into > > factor when doing our tests. > > Huh? All Celerons are multiplier-locked. How are you able to > decouple the FSB from the core? Arghh.. your right... I just went and hung a scope on the things, I had ignored the fact that the Celeron is ignoring the jumpers and the MB is just doing the right thing by forcing the clock to 66Mhz, even though the jumpers are set to 100Mhz, 4x. Go figure... :-(. Sooo.... even at 66MHz FSB we don't see much of a difference in OUR testing. [I only yelled because I know someone is going to come along with some synthetic benchmark or specific application that shows a huge difference.] -- Rod Grimes - KD7CAX @ CN85sl - (RWG25) rgrimes@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Fri Nov 5 10:50:34 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from horst.bfd.com (horst.bfd.com [12.9.219.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 643F815610 for ; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 10:50:30 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from ejs@bfd.com) Received: from HARLIE.bfd.com (bastion.bfd.com [12.9.219.14]) by horst.bfd.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA27114; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 10:47:30 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from ejs@bfd.com) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 10:47:30 -0800 (PST) From: "Eric J. Schwertfeger" To: "Rodney W. Grimes" Cc: Adam Strohl , "Daniel O'Connor" , Darryl Okahata , freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? In-Reply-To: <199911051829.KAA57885@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Fri, 5 Nov 1999, Rodney W. Grimes wrote: > > I've done make buildworld's on both my dual Celeron and my dual PPro (the > > ones with 512K cache). The difference between single and dual celeron is > > minimal, about 10%. On the dual PPro machine, the speed improvement, > > using the same disk subsystem, was 80%. Yes, on processes that aren't > > memory intensive, dual Celerons rock. In fact, on most things, I see > > closer to 40-50% improvement with dual Celerons, the make buildworld is > > rather memory intensive. > > Actually make buildworld is disk intensive... SMP plain out does not > seem to help it much, unless of course you run a non-standard make > world with -pipe, which then does make the memory bandwidth demand > higher, and if both sides of the pipe just happen to get split accross > 2 processors it causes the small cache to be ineffective and the memory > system to be a major stall point. Can't remember if I was using -pipe, this was a default 3.2 install, except that I'm pretty sure I was using soft updates. I may have been, because the HD lights would only flicker every few seconds, so it definitely wasn't disk bound. I had /usr/src, /usr/obj, and /tmp all on seperate spindles (each on a 4GB 7200 RPM SCSI drive). Given other people's comments, I'd really expect more than the 10% that I saw. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Fri Nov 5 11: 1:12 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from megadodo.segNET.COM (megadodo.segNET.COM [206.34.181.3]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 584D114BEA for ; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 11:01:07 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from adams@digitalspark.net) Received: from nightfall.digitalspark.net (arc0a131.bf.sover.net [209.198.85.131]) by megadodo.segNET.COM (8.9.1a/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA20343; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 13:52:57 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 13:52:59 +0000 (GMT) From: Adam Strohl To: Darryl Okahata Cc: "Eric J. Schwertfeger" , "Daniel O'Connor" , freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? In-Reply-To: <199911051822.KAA25575@mina.sr.hp.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Fri, 5 Nov 1999, Darryl Okahata wrote: > The numbers I've seen thrown around (and I haven't verified them) > are: > > 2 Celerons -> ~1.5X a single CPU > 2 P2s (350MHz+) -> ~1.8X a single CPU > > This is, of course, simplistic. And not a comparison of cache,as you aren't running them at the same FSB or Mulitpliers. > -- > Darryl Okahata > darrylo@sr.hp.com > - ----( Adam Strohl )------------------------------------------------ - - UNIX Operations/Systems http://www.digitalspark.net - - adams (at) digitalspark.net xxx.xxx.xxxx xxxxx - - ----------------------------------------( DigitalSpark.NET )------- - To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Fri Nov 5 11: 3: 2 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from megadodo.segNET.COM (megadodo.segNET.COM [206.34.181.3]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86B3614BEA for ; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 11:02:58 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from adams@digitalspark.net) Received: from nightfall.digitalspark.net (arc0a131.bf.sover.net [209.198.85.131]) by megadodo.segNET.COM (8.9.1a/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA20743; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 13:54:51 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 13:54:53 +0000 (GMT) From: Adam Strohl To: "Rodney W. Grimes" Cc: "Eric J. Schwertfeger" , "Daniel O'Connor" , Darryl Okahata , freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? In-Reply-To: <199911051829.KAA57885@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org I Agree totaly with this, disk is THE choke point for make world for my SMP system, must ... resist .. urge ... to ... buy ... SCSI ... hardware. :) - ----( Adam Strohl )------------------------------------------------ - - UNIX Operations/Systems http://www.digitalspark.net - - adams (at) digitalspark.net xxx.xxx.xxxx xxxxx - - ----------------------------------------( DigitalSpark.NET )------- - On Fri, 5 Nov 1999, Rodney W. Grimes wrote: > > On Thu, 4 Nov 1999, Adam Strohl wrote: > > > > > In the real world the 1/2 the cache at 2x the speed makes all of JACK > > > in performance difference from the "real" PIIs. It rocks. > > > > I agree for the most part, on single-processor machines, though it's > > actually a quarter the cache. The reduced, faster cache causes a single > > celeron to be more memory-bandwidth sensitive. An SMP machine, however, > > has two CPUs contending for the same bandwidth, and for some processes, > > that can be fatal. > > > > I've done make buildworld's on both my dual Celeron and my dual PPro (the > > ones with 512K cache). The difference between single and dual celeron is > > minimal, about 10%. On the dual PPro machine, the speed improvement, > > using the same disk subsystem, was 80%. Yes, on processes that aren't > > memory intensive, dual Celerons rock. In fact, on most things, I see > > closer to 40-50% improvement with dual Celerons, the make buildworld is > > rather memory intensive. > > Actually make buildworld is disk intensive... SMP plain out does not > seem to help it much, unless of course you run a non-standard make > world with -pipe, which then does make the memory bandwidth demand > higher, and if both sides of the pipe just happen to get split accross > 2 processors it causes the small cache to be ineffective and the memory > system to be a major stall point. > > Raid 1 (mirroring) with 3 disk drives tends to help it more than anything... > single or dual processor. Or properly splitting /usr/src, /usr/obj and > ${DESTDIR} to 3 spindles does wonders on any type of cpu, even an old > Pentium 100 sees a big improvement... > > -- > Rod Grimes - KD7CAX @ CN85sl - (RWG25) rgrimes@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Fri Nov 5 11: 8: 4 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (GndRsh.dnsmgr.net [198.145.92.4]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B454714BEA for ; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 11:08:00 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from freebsd@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net) Received: (from freebsd@localhost) by gndrsh.dnsmgr.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA57990; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 11:03:18 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from freebsd) From: "Rodney W. Grimes" Message-Id: <199911051903.LAA57990@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? In-Reply-To: from "Eric J. Schwertfeger" at "Nov 5, 1999 10:47:30 am" To: ejs@bfd.com (Eric J. Schwertfeger) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 11:03:17 -0800 (PST) Cc: adams@digitalspark.net (Adam Strohl), doconnor@gsoft.com.au (Daniel O'Connor), darrylo@sr.hp.com (Darryl Okahata), freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL54 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > On Fri, 5 Nov 1999, Rodney W. Grimes wrote: > > > > I've done make buildworld's on both my dual Celeron and my dual PPro (the > > > ones with 512K cache). The difference between single and dual celeron is > > > minimal, about 10%. On the dual PPro machine, the speed improvement, > > > using the same disk subsystem, was 80%. Yes, on processes that aren't > > > memory intensive, dual Celerons rock. In fact, on most things, I see > > > closer to 40-50% improvement with dual Celerons, the make buildworld is > > > rather memory intensive. > > > > Actually make buildworld is disk intensive... SMP plain out does not > > seem to help it much, unless of course you run a non-standard make > > world with -pipe, which then does make the memory bandwidth demand > > higher, and if both sides of the pipe just happen to get split accross > > 2 processors it causes the small cache to be ineffective and the memory > > system to be a major stall point. > > Can't remember if I was using -pipe, this was a default 3.2 install, > except that I'm pretty sure I was using soft updates. I may have been, > because the HD lights would only flicker every few seconds, so it > definitely wasn't disk bound. I had /usr/src, /usr/obj, and /tmp all on > seperate spindles (each on a 4GB 7200 RPM SCSI drive). Given other > people's comments, I'd really expect more than the 10% that I saw. Soft updates shifts the bottleneck from disk to memory. We run our baseline comparison testing using unmodified in anyway installs from CDROM of the latest version of -release. -- Rod Grimes - KD7CAX @ CN85sl - (RWG25) rgrimes@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Fri Nov 5 11:17:13 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from palrel3.hp.com (palrel3.hp.com [156.153.255.226]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39F3214BE9 for ; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 11:17:11 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from darrylo@sr.hp.com) Received: from postal.sr.hp.com (root@postal.sr.hp.com [15.4.46.173]) by palrel3.hp.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.8.5tis) with ESMTP id LAA20789; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 11:17:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from mina.sr.hp.com (root@mina.sr.hp.com [15.4.42.247]) by postal.sr.hp.com with ESMTP (8.8.6 (PHNE_17190)/8.7.3 TIS 5.0) id LAA18734; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 11:17:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (darrylo@mina.sr.hp.com [15.4.42.247]) by mina.sr.hp.com with ESMTP (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.7.3 TIS 5.0) id LAA27152; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 11:16:50 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199911051916.LAA27152@mina.sr.hp.com> To: Adam Strohl Cc: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? Reply-To: Darryl Okahata In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 05 Nov 1999 13:54:53 GMT." Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.108) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 11:16:49 -0800 From: Darryl Okahata Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Adam Strohl wrote: > I Agree totaly with this, disk is THE choke point for make world for my > SMP system, must ... resist .. urge ... to ... buy ... SCSI ... hardware. > :) Are you using softupdates and DMA? While SCSI is great, you really need multiple drives to take full advantage of SCSI. With your typical 1- or 2-drive system, IDE drives shouldn't be significantly slower than SCSI. -- Darryl Okahata darrylo@sr.hp.com DISCLAIMER: this message is the author's personal opinion and does not constitute the support, opinion, or policy of Agilent Technologies, or of the little green men that have been following him all day. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Fri Nov 5 11:28:46 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from dorifer.heim3.tu-clausthal.de (dorifer.heim3.tu-clausthal.de [139.174.243.252]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E825714D58 for ; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 11:28:32 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from olli@dorifer.heim3.tu-clausthal.de) Received: (from olli@localhost) by dorifer.heim3.tu-clausthal.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA06749 for freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 20:26:28 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from olli) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 20:26:28 +0100 (CET) From: Oliver Fromme Message-Id: <199911051926.UAA06749@dorifer.heim3.tu-clausthal.de> To: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? Organization: Administration Heim 3 Reply-To: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 RZTUC(3) PL2] Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Adam Strohl wrote in list.freebsd-smp: > I Agree totaly with this, disk is THE choke point for make world for my > SMP system, must ... resist .. urge ... to ... buy ... SCSI ... hardware. > :) No no... Buy more RAM! :-) Then put /usr/src on an MFS, and enable Soft-updates on /usr/obj (it doesn't matter much if that's IDE or SCSI, but it should use UDMA if it's IDE). Then you can do a make buildworld in less than 40 minutes on an SMP machine. I had the great pleasure to try that once. :) Regards Oliver -- Oliver Fromme, Leibnizstr. 18/61, 38678 Clausthal, Germany (Info: finger userinfo:olli@dorifer.heim3.tu-clausthal.de) "In jedem Stück Kohle wartet ein Diamant auf seine Geburt" (Terry Pratchett) To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Fri Nov 5 11:42:14 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from duke.cs.duke.edu (duke.cs.duke.edu [152.3.140.1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D18CC14BF4 for ; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 11:42:07 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from gallatin@cs.duke.edu) Received: from grasshopper.cs.duke.edu (grasshopper.cs.duke.edu [152.3.145.30]) by duke.cs.duke.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA18994; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 14:42:05 -0500 (EST) Received: (from gallatin@localhost) by grasshopper.cs.duke.edu (8.9.3/8.9.1) id OAA03467; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 14:41:35 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from gallatin@cs.duke.edu) From: Andrew Gallatin MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 14:41:35 -0500 (EST) To: mhughes@logroad.bridge.com (Michael Hughes) Cc: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Compaq Proliant 6400R In-Reply-To: <199911041442.IAA25097@logroad.bridge.com> References: <199911041442.IAA25097@logroad.bridge.com> X-Mailer: VM 6.43 under 20.4 "Emerald" XEmacs Lucid Message-ID: <14371.12888.547969.981941@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Michael Hughes writes: > I loaded 3.2 on a Compaq Proliant 6400R. It has 4 processors and 2 Gig > of memory. I compiled a new kernel and booted the system with it. It > came up and told me to add the option line on how many processors. I > did this, recompiled the kernel and rebooted. It comes up with the > following error messages: > > panic: bad PCI bus numbering > mp_lock:00000001; cpuid=0; lapic.id=03000000 > > This there something new in 3.3 that will help or has anyone seen this > before? Thanks for your help in advance. Either update to the latest -stable or apply the following patch: Index: mp_machdep.c =================================================================== RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/sys/i386/i386/mp_machdep.c,v retrieving revision 1.88.2.4 diff -u -r1.88.2.4 mp_machdep.c --- mp_machdep.c 1999/09/02 23:56:46 1.88.2.4 +++ mp_machdep.c 1999/10/12 21:38:45 @@ -1067,15 +1076,6 @@ } } } - /* sanity check if more than 1 PCI bus */ - else if (num_pci_bus > 1) { - for (x = 0; x < mp_nbusses; ++x) { - if (bus_data[x].bus_type != PCI) - continue; - if (bus_data[x].bus_id >= num_pci_bus) - panic("bad PCI bus numbering"); - } - } } ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Andrew Gallatin, Sr Systems Programmer http://www.cs.duke.edu/~gallatin Duke University Email: gallatin@cs.duke.edu Department of Computer Science Phone: (919) 660-6590 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Fri Nov 5 11:43:52 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from megadodo.segNET.COM (megadodo.segNET.COM [206.34.181.3]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0781C14BF4 for ; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 11:43:45 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from adams@digitalspark.net) Received: from nightfall.digitalspark.net (arc0a131.bf.sover.net [209.198.85.131]) by megadodo.segNET.COM (8.9.1a/8.8.5) with ESMTP id OAA02524; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 14:36:05 -0500 (EST) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 14:36:07 +0000 (GMT) From: Adam Strohl To: Darryl Okahata Cc: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? In-Reply-To: <199911051916.LAA27152@mina.sr.hp.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Yeah, I have softupdates and UDMA33 disks, and they are constantly working when I do a make buidlworld (with -j 12) on my twin 450 Celerons (300As overclocked to 100Mhz x 4.5). - ----( Adam Strohl )------------------------------------------------ - - UNIX Operations/Systems http://www.digitalspark.net - - adams (at) digitalspark.net xxx.xxx.xxxx xxxxx - - ----------------------------------------( DigitalSpark.NET )------- - On Fri, 5 Nov 1999, Darryl Okahata wrote: > Adam Strohl wrote: > > > I Agree totaly with this, disk is THE choke point for make world for my > > SMP system, must ... resist .. urge ... to ... buy ... SCSI ... hardware. > > :) > > Are you using softupdates and DMA? While SCSI is great, you really > need multiple drives to take full advantage of SCSI. With your typical > 1- or 2-drive system, IDE drives shouldn't be significantly slower than > SCSI. > > -- > Darryl Okahata > darrylo@sr.hp.com > > DISCLAIMER: this message is the author's personal opinion and does not > constitute the support, opinion, or policy of Agilent Technologies, or > of the little green men that have been following him all day. > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Fri Nov 5 14:52:52 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from bofh.dermak.pl (bofh.dermak.pl [212.160.174.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D98BB153B7 for ; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 14:51:56 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jacke@dermak.pl) Received: from localhost (jacke@localhost) by bofh.dermak.pl (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA60982 for ; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 23:51:19 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from jacke@dermak.pl) Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 23:51:17 +0100 (CET) From: Jakub Klausa To: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? In-Reply-To: <199911051926.UAA06749@dorifer.heim3.tu-clausthal.de> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Fri, 5 Nov 1999, Oliver Fromme wrote: => No no... Buy more RAM! :-) => => Then put /usr/src on an MFS, and enable Soft-updates on => /usr/obj (it doesn't matter much if that's IDE or SCSI, => but it should use UDMA if it's IDE). => => Then you can do a make buildworld in less than 40 minutes => on an SMP machine. I had the great pleasure to try that => once. :) Infact i did that once (exactly a full make world took about 41 minutes, so a buildworld had to be less then 40) when all the data was on disks. Softupdates enabled. => Oliver - -- k. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3ia Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBOCNfZ054q5P/Kvv1AQGXdQP+OECDHgQh++udpr6WPTRzicbjcR2UMwHG AFx7bvYluTmD0Jo7Tn+NS9ZCt0PTkpijKOMORQuHjSzAFK9qLAFBsYW8VYDucVWj DJAu+JEJkTc0auXum98Oln7BPHTPpGBI5ePW0LNinljv8ir/T5FLFrCPgbRZ68CL 1Xos9PBkyjw= =SAoo -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Fri Nov 5 15: 5:33 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from dingo.cdrom.com (dingo.cdrom.com [204.216.28.145]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E3CD14E58 for ; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 15:05:27 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mike@dingo.cdrom.com) Received: from dingo.cdrom.com (localhost.cdrom.com [127.0.0.1]) by dingo.cdrom.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) with ESMTP id OAA00440 for ; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 14:56:16 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mike@dingo.cdrom.com) Message-Id: <199911052256.OAA00440@dingo.cdrom.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 2/24/98 To: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 05 Nov 1999 20:26:28 +0100." <199911051926.UAA06749@dorifer.heim3.tu-clausthal.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 14:56:15 -0800 From: Mike Smith Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > Adam Strohl wrote in list.freebsd-smp: > > I Agree totaly with this, disk is THE choke point for make world for= my > > SMP system, must ... resist .. urge ... to ... buy ... SCSI ... hard= ware. > > :) > = > No no... Buy more RAM! :-) > = > Then put /usr/src on an MFS, and enable Soft-updates on > /usr/obj (it doesn't matter much if that's IDE or SCSI, > but it should use UDMA if it's IDE). > = > Then you can do a make buildworld in less than 40 minutes > on an SMP machine. I had the great pleasure to try that > once. :) Under 40 minutes is very hard on a current intel architecture box; the = 4-way Xeon 400/256 that we have here will do about 39 even on -current = as of a couple of weeks ago, with everything except $DESTDIR on an MFS. To go much faster will require more memory bandwidth, or possibly = faster CPUs with more cache (not so sure about that part). -- = \\ Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day. \\ Mike Smith \\ Tell him he should learn how to fish himself, \\ msmith@freebsd.org \\ and he'll hate you for a lifetime. \\ msmith@cdrom.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Fri Nov 5 16:31:44 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mail.rdc2.on.home.com (ha1.rdc2.on.home.com [24.9.0.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2657514F0C for ; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 16:31:26 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from street@iname.com) Received: from mired.eh.local ([24.64.136.188]) by mail.rdc2.on.home.com (InterMail v4.01.01.07 201-229-111-110) with ESMTP id <19991106003121.SVDV3040.mail.rdc2.on.home.com@mired.eh.local>; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 16:31:21 -0800 Received: (from kws@localhost) by mired.eh.local (8.9.3/8.9.3) id TAA82599; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 19:31:21 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from kws) To: Mike Smith Cc: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? References: <199911052256.OAA00440@dingo.cdrom.com> From: Kevin Street Date: 05 Nov 1999 19:31:20 -0500 In-Reply-To: Mike Smith's message of "Fri, 05 Nov 1999 14:56:15 -0800" Message-ID: <87yaccv4tj.fsf@mired.eh.local> Lines: 30 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.6.45/XEmacs 21.1 - "Biscayne" Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Mike Smith writes: > Under 40 minutes is very hard on a current intel architecture box; the > 4-way Xeon 400/256 that we have here will do about 39 even on -current > as of a couple of weeks ago, with everything except $DESTDIR on an MFS. > > To go much faster will require more memory bandwidth, or possibly > faster CPUs with more cache (not so sure about that part). Fri Oct 29 00:50:45 EDT 1999 make -f Makefile.parallel -j 20 JPAR=2 -DCLOBBER -DNOPROFILE buildworld make buildworld complete Fri Oct 29 01:30:27 EDT 1999 2384.21 real 2809.03 user 1337.21 sys elapsed 0:39:42 busy 86.95% Ok, so I cheated with -DNOPROFILE and I have a somewhat modified bsd.subdir.mk that parallelizes some subdir builds in the "building everything" phase of the make. This is with a dual 466 Celeron, 128M 66Mhz FSB, no overclocking, Abit BP6. I'm using -pipe in /etc/make.conf and /usr/src, /usr/obj and /tmp are all on a striped vinum volume that resides on 2 IBM 9G 7200RPM SCSI drives with softupdates. I like the price compared to the 4 way Xeon! -- Kevin Street street@iname.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Fri Nov 5 16:40:19 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from dingo.cdrom.com (dingo.cdrom.com [204.216.28.145]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23AD114A2D for ; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 16:40:09 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mike@dingo.cdrom.com) Received: from dingo.cdrom.com (localhost.cdrom.com [127.0.0.1]) by dingo.cdrom.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) with ESMTP id QAA00895; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 16:30:59 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mike@dingo.cdrom.com) Message-Id: <199911060030.QAA00895@dingo.cdrom.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 2/24/98 To: Kevin Street Cc: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? In-reply-to: Your message of "05 Nov 1999 19:31:20 EST." <87yaccv4tj.fsf@mired.eh.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 16:30:59 -0800 From: Mike Smith Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > Under 40 minutes is very hard on a current intel architecture box; the > > 4-way Xeon 400/256 that we have here will do about 39 even on -current > > as of a couple of weeks ago, with everything except $DESTDIR on an MFS. > > > > To go much faster will require more memory bandwidth, or possibly > > faster CPUs with more cache (not so sure about that part). > > Fri Oct 29 00:50:45 EDT 1999 > make -f Makefile.parallel -j 20 JPAR=2 -DCLOBBER -DNOPROFILE buildworld > make buildworld complete > Fri Oct 29 01:30:27 EDT 1999 > > 2384.21 real 2809.03 user 1337.21 sys > > elapsed 0:39:42 busy 86.95% > > Ok, so I cheated with -DNOPROFILE and I have a somewhat modified > bsd.subdir.mk that parallelizes some subdir builds in the "building > everything" phase of the make. This is with a dual 466 Celeron, 128M > 66Mhz FSB, no overclocking, Abit BP6. I'm using -pipe in > /etc/make.conf and /usr/src, /usr/obj and /tmp are all on a striped > vinum volume that resides on 2 IBM 9G 7200RPM SCSI drives with > softupdates. So stop cheating. I can get it down to a few hundredths of a second if I rewrite make thus: void main(void) { return(0); } But that doesn't measure anything at all. > I like the price compared to the 4 way Xeon! It was free. I'm not complaining. -- \\ Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day. \\ Mike Smith \\ Tell him he should learn how to fish himself, \\ msmith@freebsd.org \\ and he'll hate you for a lifetime. \\ msmith@cdrom.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Fri Nov 5 16:43:21 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from guru.phone.net (guru.phone.net [216.240.39.120]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B3F0814E0F for ; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 16:43:10 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mwm@phone.net) Received: (qmail 75746 invoked by uid 100); 6 Nov 1999 00:43:04 -0000 From: Mike Meyer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <14371.31128.555758.487534@guru.phone.net> Date: Fri, 5 Nov 1999 16:43:04 -0800 (PST) To: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? In-Reply-To: <199911051916.LAA27152@mina.sr.hp.com> References: <199911051916.LAA27152@mina.sr.hp.com> X-Mailer: VM 6.72 under 21.1 (patch 3) "Acadia" XEmacs Lucid X-face: "5Mnwy%?j>IIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`"(,&SiLvbbz2W`;h9L,Yg`+vb1>RG% *h+%X^n0EZd>TM8_IB;a8F?(Fb"lw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Darryl Okahata writes: ;-> Are you using softupdates and DMA? While SCSI is great, you really ;->need multiple drives to take full advantage of SCSI. With your typical ;->1- or 2-drive system, IDE drives shouldn't be significantly slower than ;->SCSI. My tests show different - see . If there's something I can do to improve the performance of the IDE drive, I'd love to hear it. ; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 17:28:03 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from darrylo@sr.hp.com) Received: from postal.sr.hp.com (postal.sr.hp.com [15.4.46.173]) by atlrel1.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E663864; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 20:26:40 -0500 (EST) Received: from mina.sr.hp.com (root@mina.sr.hp.com [15.4.42.247]) by postal.sr.hp.com with ESMTP (8.8.6 (PHNE_17190)/8.7.3 TIS 5.0) id RAA17339; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 17:26:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (darrylo@mina.sr.hp.com [15.4.42.247]) by mina.sr.hp.com with ESMTP (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.7.3 TIS 5.0) id RAA14109; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 17:26:31 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199911060126.RAA14109@mina.sr.hp.com> To: Mike Meyer Cc: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? Reply-To: Darryl Okahata In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 05 Nov 1999 16:43:04 PST." <14371.31128.555758.487534@guru.phone.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.108) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 17:26:31 -0800 From: Darryl Okahata Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Mike Meyer wrote: > Darryl Okahata writes: > ;-> Are you using softupdates and DMA? While SCSI is great, you really > ;->need multiple drives to take full advantage of SCSI. With your typical > ;->1- or 2-drive system, IDE drives shouldn't be significantly slower than > ;->SCSI. > > My tests show different - see http://www.phone.net/home/mwm/disktest/disktest.html >. If there's > something I can do to improve the performance of the IDE drive, I'd > love to hear it. Did you explicitly configure your kernel to enable DMA? I couldn't find any mention of that on your page. -- Darryl Okahata darrylo@sr.hp.com DISCLAIMER: this message is the author's personal opinion and does not constitute the support, opinion, or policy of Agilent Technologies, or of the little green men that have been following him all day. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Fri Nov 5 17:35:39 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from southpass.baynetworks.com (ns2.BayNetworks.COM [134.177.3.16]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93D2414D3D for ; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 17:35:37 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from thomma@BayNetworks.COM) Received: from mailhost.BayNetworks.COM (h016b.s86b1.BayNetworks.COM [134.177.1.107]) by southpass.baynetworks.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id RAA25936; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 17:29:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from fedex.engwest.baynetworks.com (fedex.engwest.baynetworks.com [134.177.110.46]) by mailhost.BayNetworks.COM (8.9.1/8.8.8) with SMTP id RAA03826; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 17:33:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from carrera.engwest (carrera.engwest.baynetworks.com) by fedex.engwest.baynetworks.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) Received: from localhost by carrera.engwest (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id RAA20438; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 17:31:21 -0800 To: mike@smith.net.au Cc: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 05 Nov 1999 14:56:15 -0800" <199911052256.OAA00440@dingo.cdrom.com> References: <199911052256.OAA00440@dingo.cdrom.com> X-Mailer: Mew version 1.92 on Emacs 19.28 / Mule 2.3 (SUETSUMUHANA) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <19991105173121E.thomma@baynetworks.com> Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 17:31:21 -0800 From: Tamiji Homma X-Dispatcher: imput version 971024 Lines: 11 Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > Under 40 minutes is very hard on a current intel architecture box; the > 4-way Xeon 400/256 that we have here will do about 39 even on -current > as of a couple of weeks ago, with everything except $DESTDIR on an MFS. > To go much faster will require more memory bandwidth, or possibly > faster CPUs with more cache (not so sure about that part). So, I should be happy about -current buildworld/world 49/54 minutes with K6-III/550 on single IDE drive ;-) Tammy To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Fri Nov 5 17:57:52 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from dingo.cdrom.com (dingo.cdrom.com [204.216.28.145]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B9BE314C24 for ; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 17:57:50 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mike@dingo.cdrom.com) Received: from dingo.cdrom.com (localhost.cdrom.com [127.0.0.1]) by dingo.cdrom.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) with ESMTP id RAA01240; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 17:45:24 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mike@dingo.cdrom.com) Message-Id: <199911060145.RAA01240@dingo.cdrom.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 2/24/98 To: Tamiji Homma Cc: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 05 Nov 1999 17:31:21 PST." <19991105173121E.thomma@baynetworks.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 17:45:24 -0800 From: Mike Smith Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > Under 40 minutes is very hard on a current intel architecture box; the > > 4-way Xeon 400/256 that we have here will do about 39 even on -current > > as of a couple of weeks ago, with everything except $DESTDIR on an MFS. > > > To go much faster will require more memory bandwidth, or possibly > > faster CPUs with more cache (not so sure about that part). > > So, I should be happy about -current buildworld/world 49/54 > minutes with K6-III/550 on single IDE drive ;-) With those numbers you are probably cheating. That's about what I get with a K7/500, and it has a lot more bandwidth. -- \\ Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day. \\ Mike Smith \\ Tell him he should learn how to fish himself, \\ msmith@freebsd.org \\ and he'll hate you for a lifetime. \\ msmith@cdrom.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Fri Nov 5 18:12:33 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from southpass.baynetworks.com (ns2.BayNetworks.COM [134.177.3.16]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88C6914D85 for ; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 18:12:31 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from thomma@BayNetworks.COM) Received: from mailhost.BayNetworks.COM (h016b.s86b1.BayNetworks.COM [134.177.1.107]) by southpass.baynetworks.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id SAA26882; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 18:06:35 -0800 (PST) Received: from fedex.engwest.baynetworks.com (fedex.engwest.baynetworks.com [134.177.110.46]) by mailhost.BayNetworks.COM (8.9.1/8.8.8) with SMTP id SAA06468; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 18:10:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from carrera.engwest (carrera.engwest.baynetworks.com) by fedex.engwest.baynetworks.com (4.1/SMI-4.1) Received: from localhost by carrera.engwest (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id SAA20478; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 18:08:27 -0800 To: mike@smith.net.au Cc: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 05 Nov 1999 17:45:24 -0800" <199911060145.RAA01240@dingo.cdrom.com> References: <199911060145.RAA01240@dingo.cdrom.com> X-Mailer: Mew version 1.92 on Emacs 19.28 / Mule 2.3 (SUETSUMUHANA) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <19991105180827P.thomma@baynetworks.com> Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 18:08:27 -0800 From: Tamiji Homma X-Dispatcher: imput version 971024 Lines: 24 Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > > Under 40 minutes is very hard on a current intel architecture box; the > > > 4-way Xeon 400/256 that we have here will do about 39 even on -current > > > as of a couple of weeks ago, with everything except $DESTDIR on an MFS. > > > > > To go much faster will require more memory bandwidth, or possibly > > > faster CPUs with more cache (not so sure about that part). > > > > So, I should be happy about -current buildworld/world 49/54 > > minutes with K6-III/550 on single IDE drive ;-) > > With those numbers you are probably cheating. That's about what I get > with a K7/500, and it has a lot more bandwidth. Well, I'm not cheating. ;-) Machine is KryoTech K6-3/550MHz on Asus P5A, 128M PC-100 SDRAM, Maxtor 7200rpm 20GB drive, softupdates on. I guess 550MHz 256KB L2 cache is working very well. Of course, I don't do 'make -jN' just make buildworld/world. I wonder if how KryoTech K7/900MHz(300MHz L2 cache) K7/800MHz (400MHz L2 cache) does? Tammy To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Fri Nov 5 18:21:48 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from dingo.cdrom.com (dingo.cdrom.com [204.216.28.145]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 064BD14D85 for ; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 18:21:46 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mike@dingo.cdrom.com) Received: from dingo.cdrom.com (localhost.cdrom.com [127.0.0.1]) by dingo.cdrom.com (8.9.3/8.8.8) with ESMTP id SAA01384; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 18:10:53 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mike@dingo.cdrom.com) Message-Id: <199911060210.SAA01384@dingo.cdrom.com> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.0.2 2/24/98 To: Tamiji Homma Cc: mike@smith.net.au, freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 05 Nov 1999 18:08:27 PST." <19991105180827P.thomma@baynetworks.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Fri, 05 Nov 1999 18:10:53 -0800 From: Mike Smith Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > > So, I should be happy about -current buildworld/world 49/54 > > > minutes with K6-III/550 on single IDE drive ;-) > > > > With those numbers you are probably cheating. That's about what I get > > with a K7/500, and it has a lot more bandwidth. > > Well, I'm not cheating. ;-) From experience to date, I find that fairly hard to believe. Most people that have claimed otherwise so far have subsequently been found or, or ignored. 8) > I wonder if how KryoTech K7/900MHz(300MHz L2 cache) K7/800MHz > (400MHz L2 cache) does? If/when we can convince KryoTech to send us machines for evaluation, we'll let you all know... -- \\ Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day. \\ Mike Smith \\ Tell him he should learn how to fish himself, \\ msmith@freebsd.org \\ and he'll hate you for a lifetime. \\ msmith@cdrom.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Fri Nov 5 19:16:12 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mail.rdc2.on.home.com (ha1.rdc2.on.home.com [24.9.0.15]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 43E6A14C8E for ; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 19:15:58 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from street@iname.com) Received: from mired.eh.local ([24.64.136.188]) by mail.rdc2.on.home.com (InterMail v4.01.01.07 201-229-111-110) with ESMTP id <19991106031512.VLKJ3040.mail.rdc2.on.home.com@mired.eh.local>; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 19:15:12 -0800 Received: (from kws@localhost) by mired.eh.local (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA76412; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 22:15:12 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from kws) To: Mike Smith Cc: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? References: <199911060030.QAA00895@dingo.cdrom.com> From: Kevin Street Date: 05 Nov 1999 22:15:12 -0500 In-Reply-To: Mike Smith's message of "Fri, 05 Nov 1999 16:30:59 -0800" Message-ID: <87vh7gux8f.fsf@mired.eh.local> Lines: 56 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.6.45/XEmacs 21.1 - "Biscayne" Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Mike Smith writes: > > > Under 40 minutes is very hard on a current intel architecture box; the > > > 4-way Xeon 400/256 that we have here will do about 39 even on -current > > > as of a couple of weeks ago, with everything except $DESTDIR on an MFS. > > > > > > To go much faster will require more memory bandwidth, or possibly > > > faster CPUs with more cache (not so sure about that part). > > ... > > 2384.21 real 2809.03 user 1337.21 sys > > elapsed 0:39:42 busy 86.95% > > > > Ok, so I cheated with -DNOPROFILE and I have a somewhat modified > > bsd.subdir.mk that parallelizes some subdir builds in the "building > > everything" phase of the make. This is with a dual 466 Celeron, 128M > > 66Mhz FSB, no overclocking, Abit BP6. I'm using -pipe in > > /etc/make.conf and /usr/src, /usr/obj and /tmp are all on a striped > > vinum volume that resides on 2 IBM 9G 7200RPM SCSI drives with > > softupdates. > > So stop cheating. I can get it down to a few hundredths of a second > if I rewrite make thus: > > void main(void) { return(0); } heh, I thought you'd get grumpy when I posted that :) Ok, without the -DNOPROFILE it's 44:03 I really had 2 points: 1) Dual Celeron's do work pretty well given a good workload 2) Your assertion that we need more memory bandwidth to go much faster on the buildworld - I disagree, or at least I think we have not wrung all the SMP performance out of build world that we should. One big problem with make -j N is that it does ok at parallelizing the compile of large subdirectories with lots of C modules since it starts many compiles at once. The link step seriallizes however, which means that the 2nd (& 3rd and 4th) cpus sit mostly idle. The same thing happens when building small subdirs with only one, or a few, c modules. And when the build moves between subdirs it seriallizes while it interprets the make file and sets up the parallel compiles etc. The net result on my system is that the build runs at about 70% cpu utilization overall, ie I get a max of 140% of the single cpu. Actually less because of the SMP overhead. By some relatively simple tweaking of the build rules, starting multiple subdir makes in parallel, we can get much better parallelization since while one subdir is seriallizing, the others can be running on the other cpus. With my experimental version I'm getting the average cpu up to about 87% ie getting about 178% of the single cpu. Actually the last half of the buildworld runs at about 100% utilization. The first half (building the tools and some libs) is still seriallized quite a bit since I have not tinkered with that part yet. -- Kevin Street street@iname.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Fri Nov 5 22:44:33 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from megadodo.segNET.COM (megadodo.segNET.COM [206.34.181.3]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D055E14CAC for ; Fri, 5 Nov 1999 22:44:29 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from adams@digitalspark.net) Received: from nightfall.digitalspark.net (arc1a188.bf.sover.net [209.198.80.188]) by megadodo.segNET.COM (8.9.1a/8.8.5) with ESMTP id BAA17226; Sat, 6 Nov 1999 01:40:36 -0500 (EST) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 1999 01:40:37 +0000 (GMT) From: Adam Strohl To: Kevin Street Cc: Mike Smith , freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? In-Reply-To: <87vh7gux8f.fsf@mired.eh.local> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On 5 Nov 1999, Kevin Street wrote: > I really had 2 points: > 1) Dual Celeron's do work pretty well given a good workload I agree, I'm quite happy with mine :) > 2) Your assertion that we need more memory bandwidth to go much faster > on the buildworld - I disagree, or at least I think we have not wrung > all the SMP performance out of build world that we should. One big > problem with make -j N is that it does ok at parallelizing the compile > of large subdirectories with lots of C modules since it starts many > compiles at once. Excellent point, I've noticed this, too, I hope these changes can be eventually commited as this is definatly holding my system back. I see my second CPU go idle for good chunks of time while its linking something. Glad to see someone hacking into the problem. If we fail, we _will_ lose the war -- http://www.mozilla.org/ - ----( Adam Strohl )------------------------------------------------ - - UNIX Operations/Systems http://www.digitalspark.net - - adams (at) digitalspark.net xxx.xxx.xxxx xxxxx - - ----------------------------------------( DigitalSpark.NET )------- - To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Sat Nov 6 2:28:43 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from www.matti.ee (solaris.matti.ee [194.126.98.135]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F49514CAA for ; Sat, 6 Nov 1999 02:28:39 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from vallo@matti.ee) Received: from myhakas.matti.ee (myhakas.matti.ee [194.126.114.87]) by www.matti.ee (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA08049; Sat, 6 Nov 1999 12:28:24 +0200 (EET) Received: by myhakas.matti.ee (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B1DC0106; Sat, 6 Nov 1999 12:28:23 +0200 (EET) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 1999 12:28:23 +0200 From: Vallo Kallaste To: Kevin Street Cc: Mike Smith , freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? Message-ID: <19991106122823.C5682@myhakas.matti.ee> Reply-To: vallo@matti.ee References: <199911052256.OAA00440@dingo.cdrom.com> <87yaccv4tj.fsf@mired.eh.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.6i In-Reply-To: <87yaccv4tj.fsf@mired.eh.local>; from Kevin Street on Fri, Nov 05, 1999 at 07:31:20PM -0500 Organization: =?iso-8859-1?Q?AS_Matti_B=FCrootehnika?= Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Fri, Nov 05, 1999 at 07:31:20PM -0500, Kevin Street wrote: > Fri Oct 29 00:50:45 EDT 1999 > make -f Makefile.parallel -j 20 JPAR=2 -DCLOBBER -DNOPROFILE buildworld > make buildworld complete > Fri Oct 29 01:30:27 EDT 1999 > > 2384.21 real 2809.03 user 1337.21 sys > > elapsed 0:39:42 busy 86.95% > > Ok, so I cheated with -DNOPROFILE and I have a somewhat modified > bsd.subdir.mk that parallelizes some subdir builds in the "building > everything" phase of the make. This is with a dual 466 Celeron, 128M > 66Mhz FSB, no overclocking, Abit BP6. I'm using -pipe in > /etc/make.conf and /usr/src, /usr/obj and /tmp are all on a striped > vinum volume that resides on 2 IBM 9G 7200RPM SCSI drives with > softupdates. I'm getting some 44 minutes for buildworld. Dual PIII-500 with 128MB of memory, two 7200rpm SCSI disks, /usr/src and /obj separated, softupdates enabled on both. For a while I'm using -j8 -pipe -O -DCLOBBER -DNOPROFILE. Just FYI. -- Vallo Kallaste vallo@matti.ee To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Sat Nov 6 3:45:56 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from web124.yahoomail.com (web124.yahoomail.com [205.180.60.192]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 35CC114BE7 for ; Sat, 6 Nov 1999 03:45:54 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from thallgren@yahoo.com) Message-ID: <19991106115720.25866.rocketmail@web124.yahoomail.com> Received: from [212.75.65.64] by web124.yahoomail.com; Sat, 06 Nov 1999 03:57:20 PST Date: Sat, 6 Nov 1999 03:57:20 -0800 (PST) From: =?iso-8859-1?q?Tommy=20Hallgren?= Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? To: Mike Meyer , freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Hi Mike! I think your values are crazy, something must be wrong with your system or the configuration of it. Here's a test of my system. Abit BP6 motherboard. 2x366 Celerons, 64MB RAM. -------Sequential Output-------- ---Sequential Input-- --Random-- -Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block--- --Seeks--- MB K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU /sec %CPU 128 7785 44.7 7582 15.8 3591 8.7 9843 55.9 10784 14.3 116.3 2.5 Some lines from my dmesg output: wdc0: unit 1 (wd1): , DMA, 32-bit, multi-block-16 wd1: 13783MB (28229040 sectors), 28005 cyls, 16 heads, 63 S/T, 512 B/S This drive is a 7200rpm drive. Regards, Tommy --- Mike Meyer skrev: > Darryl Okahata writes: > ;-> Are you using softupdates and DMA? While SCSI is great, you really > ;->need multiple drives to take full advantage of SCSI. With your typical > ;->1- or 2-drive system, IDE drives shouldn't be significantly slower than > ;->SCSI. > > My tests show different - see http://www.phone.net/home/mwm/disktest/disktest.html >. If there's > something I can do to improve the performance of the IDE drive, I'd > love to hear it. > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message > ===== Tommy Hallgren Briljantg. 31, SE-421 49, Göteborg Tel.: 0709 - 312 404 (GSM) Tel.: 031 - 47 65 28 (Home) __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Bid and sell for free at http://auctions.yahoo.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Sat Nov 6 9:28:38 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from mail.zuhause.org (c2-178.xtlab.com [205.215.217.178]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05E4614BCD for ; Sat, 6 Nov 1999 09:28:36 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from bruce@zuhause.mn.org) Received: by mail.zuhause.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 6565B7C31; Sat, 6 Nov 1999 11:28:35 -0600 (CST) From: Bruce Albrecht MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <14372.25923.224346.841617@celery.zuhause.org> Date: Sat, 6 Nov 1999 11:28:35 -0600 (CST) To: Joachim Strombergson Subject: Re: WINE and Star Office in FreeBSD SMP -STABLE? In-Reply-To: <38228954.F9B16724@emw.ericsson.se> References: <38228954.F9B16724@emw.ericsson.se> X-Mailer: VM 6.72 under 20.4 "Emerald" XEmacs Lucid Cc: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Joachim Strombergson writes: > As the subject suggest, could anyone tell me if WINE and/or Star Office > works on FreeBSD STABLE running in SMP-mode? > > I have thought about going to CURRENT, but am a bit concerned about > being able to get the sucker running again if the system would turn out > to be built on one of the few temporarily bad snapshots. The last time I checked, which was about 6 months ago, is that no version of 3.x after 3.0 supports programs that use shared memory with an SMP kernel, and there are no plans to retrofit the code from -current. If you want to run -current, you'll just have to read the mailing list, and pick a relatively stable period. Don't forget to read the UPDATING text, and build and install the kernel first. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Sat Nov 6 10:59:58 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from posgate.acis.com.au (posgate.acis.com.au [203.14.230.14]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28CE814ED5 for ; Sat, 6 Nov 1999 10:59:53 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from andymac@bullseye.apana.org.au) Received: from bullseye.apana.org.au (uucp@localhost) by posgate.acis.com.au (8.9.3/8.9.3) with UUCP id FAA07341; Sun, 7 Nov 1999 05:59:33 +1100 Received: from bullseye.apana.org.au (central.apana.org.au [203.9.107.245]) by bullseye.apana.org.au (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id TAA13580; Sat, 6 Nov 1999 19:58:58 +1100 (EST) (envelope-from andymac@bullseye.apana.org.au) Date: Sat, 6 Nov 1999 18:54:01 +1100 (EDT) From: Andrew MacIntyre To: "Eugene N. Drachenko" Cc: freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: GA-586DX In-Reply-To: <199911051046.MAA23812@inep.net> Message-ID: X-X-Sender: andymac@bullseye.apana.org.au MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Fri, 5 Nov 1999, Eugene N. Drachenko wrote: > I have motherboard GA-586DX with 2 Intel Pentium-150 (boxed). What value > in kernel configuration file I must set for: > > NBUS > NAPIC > NINTR Try running mptable and see what it recommends -- Andrew I MacIntyre "These thoughts are mine alone..." E-mail: andrew.macintyre@aba.gov.au (work) | Snail: PO Box 370 andymac@bullseye.apana.org.au (play) | Belconnen ACT 2616 Fido: Andrew MacIntyre, 3:620/243.18 | Australia To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Sat Nov 6 12:39:29 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from verdi.nethelp.no (verdi.nethelp.no [158.36.41.162]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D1F9314CE7 for ; Sat, 6 Nov 1999 12:39:15 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sthaug@nethelp.no) Received: (qmail 98449 invoked by uid 1001); 6 Nov 1999 20:39:13 +0000 (GMT) To: darrylo@sr.hp.com Cc: mwm@phone.net, freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Dual Celeron + FreeBSD? From: sthaug@nethelp.no In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 05 Nov 1999 17:26:31 -0800" References: <199911060126.RAA14109@mina.sr.hp.com> X-Mailer: Mew version 1.05+ on Emacs 19.34.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Sat, 06 Nov 1999 21:39:13 +0100 Message-ID: <98447.941920753@verdi.nethelp.no> Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org > > ;->With your typical > > ;->1- or 2-drive system, IDE drives shouldn't be significantly slower than > > ;->SCSI. > > > > My tests show different - see > http://www.phone.net/home/mwm/disktest/disktest.html >. If there's > > something I can do to improve the performance of the IDE drive, I'd > > love to hear it. > > Did you explicitly configure your kernel to enable DMA? I couldn't > find any mention of that on your page. I'd say that the picture is not at all clearcut any more. My tests indicate that SCSI drives still have an edge on EIDE drives for random access, but it's not huge. The CPU usage is lower for SCSI in some cases, but not all. Below are some bonnie *and* rawio measurements, with comments. After the first few tests of bonnie with 100 MB files I stopped doing this test, since it was obvious that the memory size of the machine had a great effect - even on the seek transactions. I stuck to 1000 MB test afterwards - this is greater than the memory on all the machines I tried. Steinar Haug, Nethelp consulting, sthaug@nethelp.no ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Dual Celeron-366, 66 MHz system bus, 256 MB memory, IBM DPTA-372730 (EIDE), 3.3-STABLE. Typical wall clock time: 33 s for 100 MB, 423 s for 1000 MB On the 100 MB measurements you can clearly see the unrealistic figures for number of seeks per second, and also the effect of the buffer cache on sequential input. The 1000 MB case shows much more realistic figures. The DPTA-372730 is one darn fast disk! -------Sequential Output-------- ---Sequential Input-- --Random-- -Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block--- --Seeks--- MB K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU /sec %CPU 100 17419 99.2 15785 37.6 16355 44.8 19008 100.0 128068 100.0 1691.1 33.3 100 17482 99.0 15952 38.5 16474 46.5 19025 100.0 127537 100.0 1914.6 38.0 100 17481 99.3 16687 40.7 16396 46.2 19030 100.0 127944 100.0 1866.8 36.7 100 17564 98.5 15868 37.3 16373 45.8 19053 100.0 126797 100.0 1952.8 38.7 100 17580 99.7 15995 38.9 15517 58.3 19044 100.0 127725 100.0 1897.8 36.5 1000 17359 96.4 15486 34.9 6589 16.3 16694 97.9 22465 30.9 130.3 2.9 1000 16709 94.6 15619 34.4 6929 17.0 16694 97.8 22429 30.8 126.9 2.9 1000 16641 94.5 15631 34.9 6707 16.6 16676 97.7 22470 30.9 126.7 2.8 1000 17397 96.3 15513 35.2 6612 16.1 16694 97.9 22446 30.9 129.3 2.9 1000 17378 96.4 15558 35.0 6565 16.2 16680 97.8 22458 30.9 126.9 2.9 2. Same except single Celeron-366 (kernel config without SMP). Notice that the CPU figures are significantly lower for the single CPU case. 1000 17288 88.8 15509 27.8 6526 11.4 17951 96.6 22389 20.6 121.6 1.8 1000 17428 90.2 15642 27.4 6496 11.2 17949 96.9 22402 20.6 123.3 1.9 1000 16872 86.2 15666 27.4 6961 12.1 17938 96.7 22424 20.7 124.2 1.8 1000 17480 89.8 15691 28.1 6487 11.2 17975 96.8 22418 20.8 124.4 1.8 1000 17404 89.0 15580 27.6 6505 11.2 17954 96.8 22411 20.7 124.9 1.9 3. Dual Celeron-366, 66 MHz system bus, 256 MB memory, IBM DPTA-372730 (EIDE), 4.0-CURRENT as of 29. October, new ATA driver. Typical wall clock time 453 s for 1000 MB (30 s longer than 3.3 with old wd driver). But the block output figures are better :-) 1000 16430 96.1 17374 45.0 5547 16.1 15941 95.3 22465 35.6 123.8 3.1 1000 16040 94.1 17447 44.7 5557 15.7 15796 95.2 22452 35.5 122.9 3.0 1000 16374 95.4 17508 45.6 5566 15.9 15804 95.0 22434 35.6 121.8 3.0 1000 15724 95.4 17753 43.5 5558 15.7 15849 95.6 22408 35.2 121.3 3.1 1000 16415 96.0 17428 44.3 5561 15.7 15855 95.5 22451 35.5 122.1 3.0 4. Same except single Celeron-366. 1000 17496 93.0 17420 34.0 5603 11.7 17290 94.0 22465 22.7 120.1 2.0 1000 17330 91.7 17466 33.4 5572 11.8 17302 94.1 22467 22.9 121.5 2.0 1000 17388 91.3 17554 32.0 5564 11.4 17145 93.4 22375 22.4 122.5 2.1 1000 17239 92.1 17486 31.8 5565 11.3 17300 94.4 22442 22.5 121.6 2.1 1000 17492 90.7 17627 31.5 5575 10.9 17251 93.9 22462 22.5 121.4 2.0 1000 17756 91.8 17544 33.5 5557 11.7 17219 93.7 22443 23.1 122.3 1.9 5. Single PIII-450, 100 MHz system bus, 256 MB memory, IBM DNES-318350W (SCSI), 3.3-STABLE. Typical wall clock time: 600 s for 1000 MB. 1000 17172 75.6 12696 19.3 3240 5.6 18585 84.9 18632 16.5 136.7 1.7 1000 17584 76.8 12718 19.2 3241 5.6 18610 85.0 18655 16.6 137.2 1.7 1000 17527 76.9 12709 19.4 3242 5.6 18560 84.6 18635 16.5 137.1 1.8 1000 17369 76.1 12805 19.6 3242 5.6 18602 84.8 18657 16.5 138.2 1.8 1000 17583 77.0 12723 19.4 3244 5.6 18577 85.1 18621 16.5 135.4 1.7 6. Dual PII-400, 100 MHz system bus, 512 MB memory, Seagate ST39102LC (SCSI), FreeBSD 3.2. System lightly loaded. Typical wall clock time: 510 s for 1000 MB. 1000 16668 76.0 10888 14.6 5277 11.0 15049 75.5 17213 20.9 155.8 2.6 1000 15030 68.1 10816 14.5 5260 11.1 14911 74.7 16832 20.6 156.7 2.5 1000 14663 66.6 10966 14.8 5281 11.0 14959 75.0 17213 21.0 155.5 2.6 1000 14361 65.0 10779 14.4 5250 11.0 15455 77.4 17070 20.8 155.5 2.4 1000 16052 73.0 10492 14.0 5498 11.5 15721 78.5 17481 21.2 157.1 2.6 Same configurations (numbers 1 to 6 above), but rawio instead of bonnie. 1. Dual Celeron-366, DPTA-372730, 3.3-STABLE. Test ID K/sec /sec %User %Sys %Total RR anon 1942.9 121 0.0 0.7 0.8 16384 SR anon 28884.8 1763 0.1 9.7 9.8 16384 RW anon 1755.8 109 0.1 0.7 0.7 16384 SW anon 14389.8 878 0.3 4.7 4.9 16384 RR anon 1952.5 121 0.0 0.8 0.8 16384 SR anon 28879.5 1763 0.6 9.3 9.9 16384 RW anon 1759.3 109 0.1 0.7 0.7 16384 SW anon 14340.2 875 0.2 4.6 4.7 16384 RR anon 1959.9 121 0.0 0.7 0.8 16384 SR anon 28884.4 1763 0.7 9.1 9.8 16384 RW anon 1760.6 109 0.0 0.7 0.7 16384 SW anon 14383.6 878 0.4 4.6 4.9 16384 RR anon 1959.8 121 0.1 0.7 0.8 16384 SR anon 28877.2 1763 0.5 9.4 9.9 16384 RW anon 1766.6 109 0.0 0.7 0.7 16384 SW anon 14314.6 874 0.1 4.7 4.8 16384 RR anon 1950.1 121 0.0 0.8 0.8 16384 SR anon 28884.1 1763 0.5 9.4 9.9 16384 RW anon 1762.5 109 0.1 0.7 0.7 16384 SW anon 14420.5 880 0.2 4.7 4.9 16384 2. Same except single Celeron-366. Test ID K/sec /sec %User %Sys %Total RR anon 1951.0 121 0.1 0.3 0.4 16384 SR anon 29397.9 1794 0.6 3.6 4.3 16384 RW anon 1756.5 110 0.1 0.3 0.3 16384 SW anon 14385.8 878 0.2 1.9 2.1 16384 RR anon 1974.6 122 0.1 0.3 0.4 16384 SR anon 29383.2 1793 0.3 4.0 4.3 16384 RW anon 1746.3 109 0.1 0.3 0.3 16384 SW anon 14368.7 877 0.2 1.8 2.0 16384 RR anon 1958.3 121 0.1 0.3 0.4 16384 SR anon 29395.5 1794 0.3 4.0 4.4 16384 RW anon 1760.8 110 0.1 0.3 0.3 16384 SW anon 14430.1 881 0.3 1.9 2.2 16384 RR anon 1966.8 122 0.1 0.3 0.4 16384 SR anon 29399.7 1794 0.3 3.9 4.2 16384 RW anon 1748.1 109 0.1 0.3 0.3 16384 SW anon 14354.1 876 0.3 1.8 2.2 16384 RR anon 1960.4 121 0.1 0.3 0.4 16384 SR anon 29376.8 1793 0.3 3.9 4.3 16384 RW anon 1752.0 109 0.1 0.3 0.3 16384 SW anon 14368.7 877 0.2 1.9 2.1 16384 3. Dual Celeron-366, DPTA-372730, 4.0-CURRENT. Test ID K/sec /sec %User %Sys %Total RR anon 1736.4 108 0.0 0.7 0.7 16384 SR anon 29836.4 1821 0.3 10.1 10.3 16384 RW anon 1556.6 97 0.0 0.6 0.7 16384 SW anon 14377.5 878 0.1 4.9 5.0 16384 RR anon 1714.8 107 0.1 0.6 0.7 16384 SR anon 29834.9 1821 0.3 10.0 10.4 16384 RW anon 1552.6 97 0.0 0.6 0.7 16384 SW anon 14388.3 878 0.1 4.8 4.9 16384 RR anon 1724.0 107 0.1 0.7 0.7 16384 SR anon 29828.9 1821 0.6 9.7 10.3 16384 RW anon 1556.4 97 0.0 0.6 0.7 16384 SW anon 14279.2 872 0.1 4.8 4.9 16384 RR anon 1716.7 107 0.1 0.7 0.7 16384 SR anon 29841.8 1821 1.2 9.1 10.3 16384 RW anon 1554.6 97 0.0 0.6 0.7 16384 SW anon 14323.6 874 0.3 4.6 4.9 16384 RR anon 1730.9 107 0.1 0.6 0.7 16384 SR anon 29842.9 1821 0.2 10.2 10.4 16384 RW anon 1554.1 97 0.0 0.6 0.7 16384 SW anon 14366.9 877 0.2 4.7 4.9 16384 4. Same except single Celeron-366. Test ID K/sec /sec %User %Sys %Total RR anon 1732.9 107 0.1 0.3 0.3 16384 SR anon 30428.4 1857 0.4 3.7 4.1 16384 RW anon 1570.2 97 0.1 0.2 0.3 16384 SW anon 14424.8 880 0.2 1.8 2.0 16384 RR anon 1712.8 107 0.1 0.2 0.3 16384 SR anon 30433.4 1858 0.3 3.8 4.1 16384 RW anon 1565.1 97 0.1 0.2 0.3 16384 SW anon 14404.8 879 0.2 1.8 2.0 16384 RR anon 1722.8 107 0.1 0.3 0.3 16384 SR anon 30418.9 1857 0.6 3.5 4.1 16384 RW anon 1557.7 96 0.1 0.2 0.3 16384 SW anon 14452.4 882 0.1 1.9 2.0 16384 RR anon 1730.2 107 0.1 0.3 0.3 16384 SR anon 30411.4 1856 0.6 3.5 4.1 16384 RW anon 1566.8 97 0.1 0.2 0.3 16384 SW anon 14432.1 881 0.1 1.9 2.0 16384 RR anon 1724.6 107 0.1 0.3 0.3 16384 SR anon 30403.2 1856 0.6 3.4 4.1 16384 RW anon 1558.4 97 0.1 0.2 0.3 16384 SW anon 14437.8 881 0.2 1.8 2.0 16384 5. Single PIII-450, DNES-318350W, 3.3-STABLE. Notice the sequential write figures look suspiciously low. I tried reducing the number of tags, but never got anywhere near expected figures. Test ID K/sec /sec %User %Sys %Total RR anon 2784.7 173 0.1 0.6 0.7 16384 SR anon 25155.2 1535 0.1 5.3 5.4 16384 RW anon 2325.6 145 0.1 0.5 0.6 16384 SW anon 2601.2 159 0.0 0.5 0.6 16384 RR anon 2796.1 173 0.1 0.6 0.7 16384 SR anon 25152.8 1535 0.2 5.2 5.5 16384 RW anon 2323.5 144 0.0 0.5 0.6 16384 SW anon 2600.7 159 0.0 0.5 0.6 16384 RR anon 2799.0 172 0.1 0.6 0.7 16384 SR anon 25159.5 1536 0.2 5.3 5.5 16384 RW anon 2333.0 144 0.1 0.5 0.6 16384 SW anon 2235.6 136 0.0 0.5 0.5 16384 (same but tags reduced from 64 to 32) RR anon 2796.9 173 0.1 0.6 0.7 16384 SR anon 25158.9 1536 0.3 5.2 5.5 16384 RW anon 2321.0 144 0.1 0.5 0.6 16384 SW anon 3669.7 224 0.1 0.7 0.8 16384 (same but tags reduced from 32 to 16) RR anon 2796.8 173 0.1 0.6 0.7 16384 SR anon 25029.7 1528 0.4 5.0 5.5 16384 RW anon 2345.9 144 0.0 0.5 0.6 16384 SW anon 2599.4 159 0.0 0.5 0.6 16384 (same but tags reduced from 16 to 8) RR anon 2775.0 172 0.1 0.6 0.7 16384 SR anon 25188.7 1537 0.6 4.8 5.4 16384 RW anon 2321.8 144 0.1 0.5 0.6 16384 SW anon 2601.9 159 0.0 0.6 0.6 16384 (same but tags disabled) RR anon 2039.0 127 0.1 0.3 0.4 16384 SR anon 46742.3 2853 0.7 6.3 7.0 16384 RW anon 2139.8 132 0.1 0.3 0.4 16384 SW anon 2235.5 136 0.0 0.3 0.3 16384 6. Dual PII-400, Seagate ST39102LC, FreeBSD 3.2. Test ID K/sec /sec %User %Sys %Total RR anon 3420.8 212 0.1 1.0 1.1 16384 SR anon 9201.2 562 0.1 2.3 2.3 16384 RW anon 3322.9 206 0.1 0.9 0.9 16384 SW anon 4355.2 266 0.1 0.9 1.0 16384 RR anon 3425.8 211 0.2 0.9 1.1 16384 SR anon 9238.3 564 0.1 2.2 2.3 16384 RW anon 3332.9 205 0.1 0.8 0.9 16384 SW anon 4146.8 253 0.1 0.9 1.0 16384 RR anon 3411.1 212 0.1 0.9 1.0 16384 SR anon 9227.5 563 0.2 2.1 2.3 16384 RW anon 3315.8 205 0.1 0.8 0.9 16384 SW anon 4267.2 260 0.0 1.0 1.0 16384 RR anon 3365.2 210 0.2 0.9 1.0 16384 SR anon 8909.0 544 0.1 2.1 2.2 16384 RW anon 3282.8 205 0.1 0.8 0.9 16384 SW anon 4347.1 265 0.1 1.0 1.1 16384 RR anon 3409.7 212 0.2 0.8 1.0 16384 SR anon 9480.2 579 0.1 2.2 2.3 16384 RW anon 3309.2 206 0.1 0.8 0.9 16384 SW anon 4184.4 255 0.1 0.9 1.0 16384 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message From owner-freebsd-smp Sat Nov 6 13:18:45 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Received: from guru.phone.net (guru.phone.net [216.240.39.120]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 426F214C40 for ; Sat, 6 Nov 1999 13:18:42 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mwm@phone.net) Received: (qmail 1514 invoked by uid 100); 6 Nov 1999 21:18:42 -0000 From: Mike Meyer MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <14372.39730.659338.440569@guru.phone.net> Date: Sat, 6 Nov 1999 13:18:42 -0800 (PST) To: freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Subject: forwarded message from Mike Meyer X-Mailer: VM 6.72 under 21.1 (patch 3) "Acadia" XEmacs Lucid X-face: "5Mnwy%?j>IIV\)A=):rjWL~NB2aH[}Yq8Z=u~vJ`"(,&SiLvbbz2W`;h9L,Yg`+vb1>RG% *h+%X^n0EZd>TM8_IB;a8F?(Fb"lw'IgCoyM.[Lg#r\ Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org [This is now *way* off-topic for smp - but where should it go?] sthaug@nethelp.no writes: ;->> > ;->With your typical ;->> > ;->1- or 2-drive system, IDE drives shouldn't be significantly slower than ;->> > ;->SCSI. ;->> > ;->> > My tests show different - see > > http://www.phone.net/home/mwm/disktest/disktest.html >. If there's ;->> > something I can do to improve the performance of the IDE drive, I'd ;->> > love to hear it. ;->> ;->> Did you explicitly configure your kernel to enable DMA? I couldn't ;->> find any mention of that on your page. No, I didn't. I just pulled the line from the GENERIC kernel and used that. The obvious question is why isn't DMA & multi-block read enabled by default in GENERIC? Since the flags indicate a *probe* for those capabilities, the kernel should still work for all systems, right? And most modern system should have controllers/drives that can use these things - and they make a *huge* difference - at least for me. ;->I'd say that the picture is not at all clearcut any more. My tests ;->indicate that SCSI drives still have an edge on EIDE drives for random ;->access, but it's not huge. The CPU usage is lower for SCSI in some ;->cases, but not all. Well, the claim was that for multi-drive systems SCSI still has an advantage. I can't test that one. Not sure what tests to use, either. ;->The DPTA-372730 is one darn fast disk! The raw data for the Maxtor - properly configured - indicate that it's not very far behind. You didn't say whether you had softupdates on. Adding the dmesg output for the drives would probably help. Speaking of which, here's the dmesg on the two drives in my system. Is there anything obvious that would improve the throughput on these drives before I start testing again? Nov 6 12:23:58 guru /kernel: wdc0: unit 0 (wd0): , DMA, 32-bit, multi-block-16 Nov 6 12:23:58 guru /kernel: da0: Fixed Direct Access SCSI-2 device Nov 6 12:23:58 guru /kernel: da0: 40.000MB/s transfers (20.000MHz, offset 15, 16bit), Tagged Queueing Enabled Nov 6 12:23:58 guru /kernel: da0: 8683MB (17783240 512 byte sectors: 255H 63S/T 1106C) Thanx, ; Sat, 6 Nov 1999 20:39:21 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from bruce@zuhause.mn.org) Received: by mail.zuhause.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id CD1767C32; Sat, 6 Nov 1999 22:39:19 -0600 (CST) From: Bruce Albrecht MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <14373.631.665259.999578@celery.zuhause.org> Date: Sat, 6 Nov 1999 22:39:19 -0600 (CST) To: Joachim Strombergson , freebsd-smp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: WINE and Star Office in FreeBSD SMP -STABLE? In-Reply-To: <14372.25923.224346.841617@celery.zuhause.org> References: <38228954.F9B16724@emw.ericsson.se> <14372.25923.224346.841617@celery.zuhause.org> X-Mailer: VM 6.72 under 20.4 "Emerald" XEmacs Lucid Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Bruce Albrecht writes: > Joachim Strombergson writes: > > As the subject suggest, could anyone tell me if WINE and/or Star Office > > works on FreeBSD STABLE running in SMP-mode? > > > > I have thought about going to CURRENT, but am a bit concerned about > > being able to get the sucker running again if the system would turn out > > to be built on one of the few temporarily bad snapshots. > > The last time I checked, which was about 6 months ago, is that no > version of 3.x after 3.0 supports programs that use shared memory with > an SMP kernel, and there are no plans to retrofit the code from -current. Looking back at old freebsd-smp messages, I see that the real issue is that you can't fork if you've got shared memory and are running an SMP kernel. I know WINE has this problem, and I think Star Office does too, but I don't know if there are any other major applications that get hit by this. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message