Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 08 Oct 2006 22:58:37 +0200
From:      Ivan Voras <ivoras@fer.hr>
To:        Kip Macy <kmacy@fsmware.com>
Cc:        freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: [PATCH] MAXCPU alterable in kernel config - needs testers
Message-ID:  <4529667D.8070108@fer.hr>
In-Reply-To: <20061008135031.G83537@demos.bsdclusters.com>
References:  <2fd864e0610080423q7ba6bdeal656a223e662a5d@mail.gmail.com>	<2006 10082011.53649.davidxu@freebsd.org> <egbnv6$crh$1@sea.gmane.org>  <20061008135031.G83537@demos.bsdclusters.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Kip Macy wrote:
> It will only cover the single chip Niagara 2 boxes.

Oh right, they'll doing multi chips in Niagara 2 :) Go Sun :)

Still, single T2 chips should be more common, so I'd guess it will pay
to optimize for that case.

(For the rest of the audience: Niagara 1 has 32 logical CPUs and
supports only one physical CPU/socket; Niagara 2 will have 64 logical
CPUs and support > 1 CPUs/sockets; so a 2 socket Niagara 2 box will have
128 logical processors! Cue SciFi music...)

Any word on how will they handle migration of threads across sockets (or
will it be OS's job)? Judging from T1 architecture, I think such event
would create a very large performance penalty, but I'm not an expert.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4529667D.8070108>