with hyperthreading enabled. I'll delve more deeply into this as time
allows.
On 5/14/2014 4:05 PM, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
On Wed, 14 May 2014, Paul Ausbeck wrote:
While examining the kernel log for another reason, I came across
evidence that acpi_idle, and not intel_idle, is bei
Curiouser and curiouser.
I have a second dn2800mt machine that my girlfriend uses. I ran some
tests while there and I'm more uncertain than ever about what is going on.
First, hdparm does not report correctly with hyperthreading enabled just
as with the original machine. However, the pr
On Wed, 14 May 2014, Paul Ausbeck wrote:
> While examining the kernel log for another reason, I came across
> evidence that acpi_idle, and not intel_idle, is being used on my
> dn2800mt system, see below. In fact, it seems that intel_idle cannot
> be used. Is there some sort of binary blob involved
While examining the kernel log for another reason, I came across
evidence that acpi_idle, and not intel_idle, is being used on my
dn2800mt system, see below. In fact, it seems that intel_idle cannot be
used. Is there some sort of binary blob involved here?
-
On Fri, 09 May 2014, Paul Ausbeck wrote:
> I've actually done dummy file reads and writes previously. Well
> actually just writes. And they go at full speed, no matter what
> hparm says. For example, your example, works at full speed:
> dd if=/dev/zero of=somefile bs=10M count=100 ;
You have to c
ev/null if=somefile bs=10M count=100 ;
but I wasn't able to find a way to purge the disk cache before I got
sidetracked. Perhaps you know of a magic incantation for that?
Also, if you look at my data again, you'll see that hdparm -T is not affected
by the hyperthreading state, it's only
st that you are aware of the possibility that you might end up
testing the cpu heatsink/cooler as well...
> But, the system doesn't appear to be THAT much more unresponsive
> when hyperthreading is enabled over when disabled. So I'm leaning
> toward the idea that hdparm's cal
k at it like this. hdparm says that disk bandwidth is much lower
than it should be, but only when hyperthreading is enabled. But, the
system doesn't appear to be THAT much more unresponsive when
hyperthreading is enabled over when disabled. So I'm leaning toward the
idea that hdparm
On Thu, 08 May 2014, Paul Ausbeck wrote:
> Next, I don't agree that this hyperthreading problem reeks of a
> firmware issue. What it reeks of is a linux kernel issue. I'm not
Well, it reeks of bad interaction of Linux and the firmware, which *usually*
is caused by bad firmwa
I don't favor the interleaved response technique, so even if that
technique is favored on this list, I'll just stay with keeping enough
context so that previous messages don't need frequent reference.
Next, I don't agree that this hyperthreading problem reeks of a firm
On Mon, 05 May 2014, Paul Ausbeck wrote:
> I've attached the contents of /proc/cpuinfo below, two copies, one
> with hyperthreading disabled and one enabled.
As I told you, the *very first thing* you must do is to make sure you're
using the latest firmware for your motherboard (
I've attached the contents of /proc/cpuinfo below, two copies, one with
hyperthreading disabled and one enabled.
I've also investigated things a bit further and now I'm thinking that
the hyperthreading state affects the system as a whole, not just hdparm.
First, I've at
ings from hdparm. I found that if I
> disable hyperthreading in the bios, bandwidth readings are as
> expected. I believe the numbers reported by hdparm are incorrect
Did you update to the latest available BIOS for your motherboard ?
--
"One disk to rule them all, One disk to find
Running Wheezy 7.4, kernel 3.2.0-4-686-pae, also on Debian backports
kernel 3.12-0.bpo.1-686-pae
sudo hdparm -t /dev/sda
/dev/sda: # Hyperthreading enabled in bios
Timing buffered disk reads: 36 MB in 3.06 seconds = 11.77 MB/sec
# Apparently not correct
/dev/sda: # Hyperthreading
not a good idea if the CPUs involved are logical siblings of
> each other on the same physical CPU? I thought that the Linux kernel was
> hyperthreading-aware and would take these kinds of things into
> consideration. Is this a true shortcoming of the scheduler, or is my system
> miscon
ding the kernel will resolve this as well.
Thanks,
Sven
-Original Message-
From: Stan Hoeppner [mailto:s...@hardwarefreak.com]
Sent: vrijdag 4 maart 2011 16:10
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Hyperthreading problem with IRQ handling and scheduling
Sven Groot put forth on 3/3/2
Sven Groot put forth on 3/3/2011 11:28 PM:
Hello Sven,
> I am using a cluster of machines running Debian 5.0.4, kernel
> 2.6.26-2-amd64. These machines have dual Intel Xeon E5530 2.4GHz CPUs, which
> are quad-core CPUs with hyperthreading. So that means each machine has 8
> physica
Hello all,
I am using a cluster of machines running Debian 5.0.4, kernel
2.6.26-2-amd64. These machines have dual Intel Xeon E5530 2.4GHz CPUs, which
are quad-core CPUs with hyperthreading. So that means each machine has 8
physical CPUs and a total of 16 logical CPUs.
I have run into an
Hello all,
I am using a cluster of machines running Debian 5.0.4, kernel
2.6.26-2-amd64. These machines have dual Intel Xeon E5530 2.4GHz CPUs, which
are quad-core CPUs with hyperthreading. So that means each machine has 8
physical CPUs and a total of 16 logical CPUs.
I have run into an
On Sat, 02 Oct 2010 20:42:01 -0500, Mark wrote in message
<4ca7df69.7040...@allums.com>:
> On 10/2/2010 6:08 PM, Nathen wrote:
> > Pretty simple question really, does Debian i.e. the current Linux
> > Kernel handle hyperthreading well? I have a server running on an
> >
On Sun, 03 Oct 2010 01:21:33 +0100, Nathen wrote:
> Thanks for replying. The system is running mainly a file server so it's
> not very CPU-intensive, I wanted to be sure I wasn't wasting performance
> by having it enabled, for example. Thanks
I don't think you are going to get any penalty in perf
On 10/2/2010 6:08 PM, Nathen wrote:
Pretty simple question really, does Debian i.e. the current Linux
Kernel handle hyperthreading well? I have a server running on an Intel
Atom D510, should I have HT enabled or disabled to get the best
performance?
Thanks. :)
Recently (kernel 2.6.31 or so
Thanks for replying. The system is running mainly a file server so
it's not very CPU-intensive, I wanted to be sure I wasn't wasting
performance by having it enabled, for example.
Thanks
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? C
On Sun, 3 Oct 2010 00:08:30 +0100
Nathen wrote:
> Pretty simple question really, does Debian i.e. the current Linux
> Kernel handle hyperthreading well? I have a server running on an Intel
> Atom D510, should I have HT enabled or disabled to get the best
> performance?
> Thanks. :
On Sun, 3 Oct 2010 00:08:30 +0100
Nathen wrote:
> Pretty simple question really, does Debian i.e. the current Linux
> Kernel handle hyperthreading well? I have a server running on an Intel
> Atom D510, should I have HT enabled or disabled to get the best
> performance?
> Thanks.
Pretty simple question really, does Debian i.e. the current Linux
Kernel handle hyperthreading well? I have a server running on an Intel
Atom D510, should I have HT enabled or disabled to get the best
performance?
Thanks. :)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with
On Fri, 10 Nov 2006, Colin wrote:
I don't think Pentium D processors are suppose to have two cores. Some
of them have hyperthreading which can make then behave like they have
two cores.
The Pentium D (dual) has two physical cores smudged together on one die,
for a total of two cores.
Some
of them have hyperthreading which can make then behave like they have
two cores.
> Seeing in /proc/cpuinfo that the CPU supports Hyperthreading (the ht
> flag is in the supported CPU features of this computer),
Just because the ht flag is there doesn't mean that supports
hype
/proc/cpuinfo that the CPU supports Hyperthreading (the ht
flag is in the supported CPU features of this computer), I compiled a
brand new kernel (2.6.19-rc4 at the time) and answered Yes to the option
of using Symmetrict Multithreading (aka Hyperthreading in Intel-speak).
I posted things that I th
t hours trying to figure this out, through google
>but no luck. I have a single pentium 4 w/ hyperthreading and am
>running kernel 2.6.13. I built my own kernel and enabled HT and
>the system seems to recognize two processors.
>
>Here is /proc/cpuinfo:
>
>/
t hours trying to figure this out, through google
>but no luck. I have a single pentium 4 w/ hyperthreading and am
>running kernel 2.6.13. I built my own kernel and enabled HT and
>the system seems to recognize two processors.
>
>Here is /proc/cpuinfo:
>
>/
What is meant by not working? /proc/cpuinfo shows two processors:
cpu 0 and cpu 1.
-ishwar
On Sat, 7 Jan 2006, Brandon Simmons wrote:
> running kernel 2.6.13. I built my own kernel and enabled HT and
> the system seems to recognize two processors.
>
> Here is /proc/cpuinfo:
>
> /
HI
I have just spent hours trying to figure this out, through google
but no luck. I have a single pentium 4 w/ hyperthreading and am
running kernel 2.6.13. I built my own kernel and enabled HT and
the system seems to recognize two processors.
Here is /proc/cpuinfo
On Sat, 23 Jul 2005 12:13:05 -0500
"Andrew J. Fields" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am in the process of building a new computer, and was wondering if
> Debian 3.1r0a is capable of running on a P4 3.2E Ghz processor with HT
> Technology. Also, if the OS doesn't support HT, could it still work
> a
On 7/23/05, Andrew J. Fields <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I am in the process of building a new computer, and was wondering if Debian
> 3.1r0a is capable of running on a P4 3.2E Ghz processor with HT Technology.
> Also, if the OS doesn't support HT, could it still work anyway. Lastly, if
> this won
I am in the process of building a new computer, and was wondering if Debian
3.1r0a is capable of running on a P4 3.2E Ghz processor with HT Technology.
Also, if the OS doesn't support HT, could it still work anyway. Lastly, if
this wont work, could you recommend any distributions of Linux that supp
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004, Micha Feigin wrote:
> I don't know enough about hyperthreading vs. real SMP but IIRC 2.6
> kernels are much better at smp then 2.4
They are extremely better at SMT (HyperThreading) than 2.4 kernels are.
But HT works just fine on 2.4, I am typing this from a In
On Tue, Oct 12, 2004 at 02:49:19PM -0300, Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Oct 2004, Paolo Alexis Falcone wrote:
> > > I've got P4 3GHz Hyperthreading on Intel 865PERL
> > > mainboard,
> > > hyperthreading enable on BIOS.
> > > I&#
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004, Paolo Alexis Falcone wrote:
> > I've got P4 3GHz Hyperthreading on Intel 865PERL
> > mainboard,
> > hyperthreading enable on BIOS.
> > I'm currently using sid 2.4.27 kernel with alsa
> > compiled.
> > I had tried to use 2.4.27
t good enough
> how to to
> enabling hyperthreading in my desktop debian.
> I've got P4 3GHz Hyperthreading on Intel 865PERL
> mainboard,
> hyperthreading enable on BIOS.
> I'm currently using sid 2.4.27 kernel with alsa
> compiled.
> I had tried to use 2.4.2
I'm very sorry for asking the same question as I had
before.
But since googling doesn't help me much ( no luck I
guess or I'm just
too lazy ), I wonder if anybody here got good enough
how to to
enabling hyperthreading in my desktop debian.
I've got P4 3GHz Hyperthreading on Int
, tried
several boot parameters: (acpismp=ht, acpismp=force) and greped
the kernel sources for hyperthreading).
Has anyone got HT working with 2.4.23?
Thanks, Thomas
here is one of my logs:
(actually there are 4 procs found but only 2 activated)
Dec 9 17:00:38 master05 kernel: ACPI: have wakeup
Hello debian-user,
I have installed a Debian Woody with a 2.4.22 kernel taken from Debian
unstable on a Intel 865 mainboard with a Pentium4 processor with
hyperthreading support.
The kernel is configured as SMP and it can see the two "virtual"
processors correctly. Everything w
On Mon, 2003-09-29 at 14:42, Sindre wrote:
> > The BIOS is pre-OS, so that logo must be displayed by Windows.
>
> Your facts are right, but your conclusion is wrong, the bios is actually aware
> if the last booted OS did use smp or not.
> My quad cpu compaq report 3 of the cpus as failed if I reb
On Mon, 2003-09-29 at 14:29, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-09-29 at 07:59, Andrew Ingram wrote:
> > On Mon, 2003-09-29 at 13:19, Greg Norris wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 29, 2003 at 12:09:18PM +0100, Andrew Ingram wrote:
> [snip]
> > Sounds easy enough! Might explain why my BIOS logo doesn't sport
> The BIOS is pre-OS, so that logo must be displayed by Windows.
Your facts are right, but your conclusion is wrong, the bios is actually aware
if the last booted OS did use smp or not.
My quad cpu compaq report 3 of the cpus as failed if I reboot after using a
non-smp kernel, or 2 failed if I l
On Mon, 2003-09-29 at 07:59, Andrew Ingram wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-09-29 at 13:19, Greg Norris wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 29, 2003 at 12:09:18PM +0100, Andrew Ingram wrote:
[snip]
> Sounds easy enough! Might explain why my BIOS logo doesn't sport the
> "HT" after a reboot of Linux, but does after a reboo
tel P4 processor with HyperThreading? Just realised my kernel has SMP
> > disabled which might have been a mistake, but I can't find a definitive
> > answer by googling.
>
> You need to enable SMP, and also ACPI CPU Enumeration... either
> CONFIG_ACPI_HT_ONLY or CONFIG_ACPI_PROCESS
On Mon, 29 Sep 2003, Greg Norris wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 29, 2003 at 12:09:18PM +0100, Andrew Ingram wrote:
> > Can anyone tell me if there is anything special I should enable in my
> > kernel (or any other Debian configuration) to make the most out of an
> > Intel P4 processo
On Mon, Sep 29, 2003 at 12:09:18PM +0100, Andrew Ingram wrote:
> Can anyone tell me if there is anything special I should enable in my
> kernel (or any other Debian configuration) to make the most out of an
> Intel P4 processor with HyperThreading? Just realised my kernel has SMP
> di
Andrew Ingram wrote:
Can anyone tell me if there is anything special I should enable in my
kernel (or any other Debian configuration) to make the most out of an
Intel P4 processor with HyperThreading? Just realised my kernel has SMP
disabled which might have been a mistake, but I can't f
Can anyone tell me if there is anything special I should enable in my
kernel (or any other Debian configuration) to make the most out of an
Intel P4 processor with HyperThreading? Just realised my kernel has SMP
disabled which might have been a mistake, but I can't find a definitive
answ
On Sat, 2003-01-04 at 21:13, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 02, 2003 at 07:35:41PM +0100, mess-mate wrote:
> > On Tue, 31 Dec 2002 20:16:03 -0800 (PST)
> > "nate" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > | nick lidakis said:
[snip]
> > Well, ASUS suggest to compile with the Hyper-Threading compiler ???
>
/cpu combo that was fully supported by a recent linux kernel. I
> | > was looking a an Intel 845PE motherboard with a 3.0Ghz cpu. My question
> | > is, how is Hyperthreading supported under linux? Is it a matter of
> | > enabling SMP in the kernel? Anyone playing with one of these C
el 845PE motherboard with a 3.0Ghz cpu. My question
| > is, how is Hyperthreading supported under linux? Is it a matter of
| > enabling SMP in the kernel? Anyone playing with one of these CPU's?
|
|
| it is supported by default. the system will see double the cpus there
| actually are.
nick lidakis said:
> I was looking to replace my 1Ghz P3 and motherboard with a stable, but
> fast mb/cpu combo that was fully supported by a recent linux kernel. I
> was looking a an Intel 845PE motherboard with a 3.0Ghz cpu. My question
> is, how is Hyperthreading supported under
I was looking to replace my 1Ghz P3 and motherboard with a stable, but
fast mb/cpu combo that was fully supported by a recent linux kernel. I
was looking a an Intel 845PE motherboard with a 3.0Ghz cpu. My question
is, how is Hyperthreading supported under linux? Is it a matter of
enabling
57 matches
Mail list logo
