From owner-freebsd-smp  Sat Nov  7 18:44:18 1998
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id SAA15378
          for freebsd-smp-outgoing; Sat, 7 Nov 1998 18:44:18 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG)
Received: from godzilla.zeta.org.au (godzilla.zeta.org.au [203.15.68.22])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id SAA15371;
          Sat, 7 Nov 1998 18:44:15 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from bde@godzilla.zeta.org.au)
Received: (from bde@localhost)
	by godzilla.zeta.org.au (8.8.7/8.8.7) id NAA32642;
	Sun, 8 Nov 1998 13:43:52 +1100
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1998 13:43:52 +1100
From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
Message-Id: <199811080243.NAA32642@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
To: jc@irbs.com, mike@smith.net.au
Subject: Re: Dog Sloooow SMP
Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG, smp@FreeBSD.ORG
Sender: owner-freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org

>No idea.  I've received verification that fixing this for all 686-class
>CPUs seems to work (ie. it's OK on the Cyrix MII and doesn't appear to 
>impact performance there), so the tests are now generalised for the 
>entire 686-class.

It's only OK for MII's because of various `#if 0's and `#ifdef SMP's
that prevent non-OK code from running on MII's.

Bruce

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message