From owner-freebsd-current Fri Dec 18 03:50:08 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id DAA27745 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Fri, 18 Dec 1998 03:50:08 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from zippy.cdrom.com (zippy.cdrom.com [204.216.27.228]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id DAA27739 for ; Fri, 18 Dec 1998 03:50:05 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jkh@zippy.cdrom.com) Received: from zippy.cdrom.com (jkh@localhost.cdrom.com [127.0.0.1]) by zippy.cdrom.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id DAA31119; Fri, 18 Dec 1998 03:50:05 -0800 (PST) To: Karl Pielorz cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Also seeing IRQ oddness with -current now. In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 18 Dec 1998 11:38:08 GMT." <367A3EA0.793C5806@tdx.co.uk> Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 03:50:05 -0800 Message-ID: <31115.913981805@zippy.cdrom.com> From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > My SuperMicro P6DNF has done this since the first time I ran SMP -current on > it... I vaguely remember talking to someone about it - I'm sure they said it OK, well, let me ask you another question then: Going from a single to dual CPU configuration, did you see any change in your "worldstone" times? Before I added a second CPU to my PII/450 tonite (and started seeing those messages as a consequence of added SMP support), I carefully timed a `make -j4 world' running off a single 9GB Cheetah with soft updates enabled for all file systems. With one CPU, it's 1:05. With two CPUs, it's 1:01. This either proves that I'm seriously I/O bound or that multiple CPUs aren't helping the compile times for some weird reason. :-) None of the other benchmarks I've found (GENERICstone, rc5, calculating pi :-) seem to be affected by single-vs-dual CPU, but this doesn't particularly surprise me either. The fact that rc5crack claims to use multiple CPUs doesn't necessarily make it so and none of the others are designed to benefit from SMP at all. Hmmmm. As usual, we come down to the fact that we really don't have any decent benchmarks for measuring the effectiveness of SMP. I've asked the folks who sell SMP Linux systems at VA Research about this and they've also confessed to not really having any decent ways of actually testing Linux's effectiveness for SMP. Looks like we can at least claim parity with Linux as far as that one is concerned. :-) - Jordan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message