RE: smp in 5.1

[Evan Dower]

I've got a dual athlon 1900+ MP. I've run both 4.x and 5.x. On 5.x I've 
tried both schedulers (4BSD and ULE). I don't think I've ever had any 
crashes, except when I install nvidia-driver, and then it crashes all the 
time. Theoretically 5.x should be better for smp as much work has happened 
in terms of locking. I haven't done any benchmarks, but I wouldn't expect 
any dramatic improvement, as locking work in many subsystems is still 
incomplete. Many things still need GIANT. 5.x does have a bunch of other 
good stuff though, and going that route saves you from upgrading later 
through an even bigger version gap. That's my two sense, and if it sounds 
like I know what I'm talking about, it's pure coincidence ;-) Others: please 
correct me if I got anything really wrong (I tried to be vague enough to 
aviod that, but we'll see).
;-)
Evan Dower


From: Andre Guibert de Bruet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: smp in 5.1
Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 22:40:21 -0400 (EDT)
I guess I'll chime in as well... I have a Dual Athlon 2000+ MP here and
it's running like a charm with SCHED_4BSD.
Andy

> Andre Guibert de Bruet | Enterprise Software Consultant >
> Silicon Landmark, LLC. | http://siliconlandmark.com/    >
On Mon, 11 Aug 2003, derwood wrote:

> I've been running 5.1-Current since its release on a Dell Precision 410 
with
> dual P-III 500's
> No SMP problems here at all.. Its been extremely stable for me thus far.
>
> Darin -
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Steve Kargl
> Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 7:10 PM
> To: Andy Farkas
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Eriq Lamar
> Subject: Re: smp in 5.1
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 12, 2003 at 08:25:38AM +1000, Andy Farkas wrote:
> > On Mon, 11 Aug 2003, Eriq Lamar wrote:
> >
> > > Is there any advantage in 5.1 over 4.8 for two amd mp's. and if so
> > > could someone tell what they are. I am interested in building dual
> > > system using mp's but not sure which version would be better.
> >
> > Scheduling in 5.1 is broken (sched_ule doesn't even work*).
> >
> > Stick with 4.8.
> >
> > * for me, sched_ule completely locks up my box, no ping, no keybd.
> > Exact same kernel with sched_4bsd works fine.
> >
>
> Strange.  ULE has worked fine on my UP system for
> several months and the SMP system I recently obtained
> from a co-worker hasn't panicked while running ULE.
> Can you drop into ddb and trace the problem with
> ULE on your system?
>
> --
> Steve
> _______________________________________________
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to 
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
>
> _______________________________________________
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to 
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
>
_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
_________________________________________________________________
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. 
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"