On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 06:51:45PM -0500, Ted Unangst wrote:
> What follows is a somewhat older mail I had forgotten about. It's
> suddenly become more interesting to be because I was playing around with
> jruby which requires a big heap size. It pisses me off to own a 3GB
> laptop and only be
On Sun, 28 Nov 2010, Philip Guenther wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Nov 2010, Philip Guenther wrote:
> > On Sunday, November 28, 2010, David Gwynne wrote:
> ...
> > > Log message:
> > > bump the number of supported cpus from 32 up to 64. lets me attach and use
> > > all 48 cores in one of my boxes.
> > >
> >
On Sunday, November 28, 2010, Philip Guenther wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Nov 2010, Philip Guenther wrote:
>> On Sunday, November 28, 2010, David Gwynne wrote:
> ...
>> > Log message:
>> > bump the number of supported cpus from 32 up to 64. lets me attach and
use
>> > all 48 cores in one of my boxes.
>>
On Sun, 28 Nov 2010, Philip Guenther wrote:
> On Sunday, November 28, 2010, David Gwynne wrote:
...
> > Log message:
> > bump the number of supported cpus from 32 up to 64. lets me attach and use
> > all 48 cores in one of my boxes.
> >
> > requested by deraadt@
> > made possible by the recent pma
On Sunday, November 28, 2010, David Gwynne wrote:
> CVSROOT:/cvs
> Module name:src
> Changes by: d...@cvs.openbsd.org2010/11/28 17:04:09
>
> Modified files:
> sys/arch/amd64/include: cpu.h
>
> Log message:
> bump the number of supported cpus from 32 up to 64. lets m
i agree with mark.
On 28/11/2010, at 11:12 PM, Mark Kettenis wrote:
>> Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2010 17:02:43 +1100 (EST)
>> From: Damien Miller
>>
>> On Sat, 27 Nov 2010, Ted Unangst wrote:
>>
>>> if you really really need to know that your cpu cache has 48 fully
>>> associative entries, go consult
What follows is a somewhat older mail I had forgotten about. It's
suddenly become more interesting to be because I was playing around with
jruby which requires a big heap size. It pisses me off to own a 3GB
laptop and only be able to use 1GB of that memory.
This does 2.5 things.
1. If uvm_m
Mark Kettenis(mark.kette...@xs4all.nl) on 2010.11.27 20:12:14 +0100:
> > Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 14:39:41 -0700
> > From: Theo de Raadt
> >
> > commit. someone will eventually fix MCLGETI, since it is in the tree.
>
> The problem is that re(4) has a "forever" loop from which we only
> escape if
On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 7:57 AM, Ian Darwin wrote:
>> Best thing would be to print it once per socket, i.e. for the first
>> core of each physical CPU.
>>
>> Oh, and the flags can be subtly different for other CPUs in the
>> system, even if they are exactly the same model, because the BIOS can
>>
> Best thing would be to print it once per socket, i.e. for the first
> core of each physical CPU.
>
> Oh, and the flags can be subtly different for other CPUs in the
> system, even if they are exactly the same model, because the BIOS can
> enable/disable some features.
Yes to the first, and the
> Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2010 17:02:43 +1100 (EST)
> From: Damien Miller
>
> On Sat, 27 Nov 2010, Ted Unangst wrote:
>
> > if you really really need to know that your cpu cache has 48 fully
> > associative entries, go consult the spec sheet. otherwise, save some
> > electrons.
>
> or, how about o
> Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2010 21:13:23 -0500 (EST)
> From: Ted Unangst
>
> if you really really need to know that your cpu cache has 48 fully
> associative entries, go consult the spec sheet. otherwise, save some
> electrons.
Well, those spec sheets aren't always easy to find. From time to time
C
Hello,
it looks like everything is working fine with this patch.
best regards
M.K.
W dniu 2010-11-27 20:12, Mark Kettenis pisze:
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 14:39:41 -0700
From: Theo de Raadt
commit. someone will eventually fix MCLGETI, since it is in the tree.
The problem is that re(4) has a "
13 matches
Mail list logo
