Date: Sun, 20 Apr 1997 07:32:25 -0400 From: "David S. Miller" <davem@jenolan.rutgers.edu> To: james@wgold.demon.co.uk Cc: perlsta@fang.cs.sunyit.edu, freebsd-hackers@freeBSD.org Subject: Re: Price of FreeBSD (was On Holy Wars...) Message-ID: <199704201132.HAA05697@jenolan.caipgeneral> In-Reply-To: <335730D4.7AF7@wgold.demon.co.uk> (message from James Mansion on Fri, 18 Apr 1997 09:29:08 %2B0100)
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 09:29:08 +0100 From: James Mansion <james@wgold.demon.co.uk> There is an SMP kernel under development. As there is one for Linux. But neither system has this as the core kernel line and neither is finished or robust. Incorrect, in 2.0.x and even more so in 2.1.x SMP is fully supported and in the sources for both the Sparc and Intel platform (Alpha coming soon). The comment on robustness is pretty much correct although I use it on all my development boxes, for 2.0.x Sparc SMP is much more stable, for 2.1.x lately both Intel and Sparc are of similar stability. We've threaded the heart of at least a few major subsystems of the kernel already (scheduler, interrupts, drivers, and wait queues), we are currently threading the vfs layer and next the buffer/page caches and networking should come reasonably soon after that. ---------------------------------------------//// Yow! 11.26 MB/s remote host TCP bandwidth & //// 199 usec remote TCP latency over 100Mb/s //// ethernet. Beat that! //// -----------------------------------------////__________ o David S. Miller, davem@caip.rutgers.edu /_____________/ / // /_/ ><
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199704201132.HAA05697>