On Thursday, 19 April 2001 at 10:10:51 -0700, John Baldwin wrote:
>
> On 19-Apr-01 Dennis wrote:
>> I understand there is a language thing, but I went out of my way to say
>> that i wasnt saying that SMP shouldnt be supported. It already is, and its
>> been done very cleanly in a way that doesnt compromise the integrity of the
>> OS internals.
>
> Actually, it's done in about the most inefficient manner possible, to be
> brutally honest. The first stage of the SMP support focused more on getting
> the machine to run than on getting it to perform well. You really should go do
> some actual research on SMP before spouting off. I highly recommend Curt
> Schimmel's _Unix Systems for Modern Architectures_: Caching and SMP for Kernel
> Programmers. If you read it, you will find that our current implementation is
> actually worse than a master/slave kernel setup, which is the slowest one
> mentioned in the book. :(
Well, no, it does mention our approach as being the slowest, even
slower than master-slave :-)
Greg
--
Finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] for PGP public key
See complete headers for address and phone numbers
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
