Re: Calxeda processors
http://www.calxeda.com Anyone know what the status would be of running our fav OS on these quadcore, blade based server processors? Running a server at 5W would be reeaal nice, you know :) not really 5W. you have to connect some hard drive anyway. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Calxeda processors
I just stumbled on these new ARM based chipsets. Apparently one the FreeBSD folk was onboard with the company as a software engineer as well. http://www.calxeda.com Anyone know what the status would be of running our fav OS on these quadcore, blade based server processors? Running a server at 5W would be reeaal nice, you know :) Cheers ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Does padlock(4) driver support VIA Nano processors?
The padlock(4) man page says that it supports hardware accelerated aes/RNG in VIA C3, C7 and Eden processors. The new Nano processor series also includes Padlock, so this processor supported by FreeBSD's padlock driver although the man page does not mention it? I am thinking of buying an M830/Nano platform to build a low power custom NAS with encrypted volumes and thus it is necessary to get hardware acceleration for geli. Thank you for your answer beforehand. -- Arto Pekkanen ksym@IRCnet ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Need to compile kernel for 2 or more processors?
Hello all. I hope this question does not sound so stupid. I am sorry in advance. I am doing my guideline of the activities I need to do to change an old 2 processors INtel 386 machine with 1GB of ram and 30GB of hard disk. The machine is working fine but after more than 10 years of working will be replaced for a new machine (could be an i3, i7, or xeon maybe). This one will be honored and will continue working as our secondary DNS. Actually is running Freebsd version 7.3 PRERELEASE . I will updated to 7.3 RELEASE. This machine has 2 physical processors and I remember that on old version of FreeBSD I have to compile the kernel so the second processor could be seen. I still do not know aht processor will be but I am looking for the strongest and cheapest combination of motherboard and processor. Anyway, I was wondering, if it is only one physycal processor with 2-4 embedded (xeon by exmaple) I guess that actually we do not have to change the kernel so all processors can be seen? Am I right ? By the way, if you can suggest based on experience the best combination on price performance of motherboard/processor to follow (not necessary the latest one) please let me know. Thanks in advance Jorge Biquez ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Need to compile kernel for 2 or more processors?
On Sun, Dec 5, 2010 at 12:39 PM, Jorge Biquez jbiq...@intranet.com.mxwrote: Hello all. I hope this question does not sound so stupid. I am sorry in advance. I am doing my guideline of the activities I need to do to change an old 2 processors INtel 386 machine with 1GB of ram and 30GB of hard disk. The machine is working fine but after more than 10 years of working will be replaced for a new machine (could be an i3, i7, or xeon maybe). This one will be honored and will continue working as our secondary DNS. Actually is running Freebsd version 7.3 PRERELEASE . I will updated to 7.3 RELEASE. This machine has 2 physical processors and I remember that on old version of FreeBSD I have to compile the kernel so the second processor could be seen. I still do not know aht processor will be but I am looking for the strongest and cheapest combination of motherboard and processor. Anyway, I was wondering, if it is only one physycal processor with 2-4 embedded (xeon by exmaple) I guess that actually we do not have to change the kernel so all processors can be seen? Am I right ? By the way, if you can suggest based on experience the best combination on price performance of motherboard/processor to follow (not necessary the latest one) please let me know. Thanks in advance Jorge Biquez IIRC, FreeBSD7+ kernels are compiled w/ SMP already, atleast I know my FBSD7.3 box is compiled w/ it and it's been that way since I installed it like 3 years ago. Multicore CPU's are realistically cheap, Dual and Quad Core CPU's would run you somewhere between $50-$100 in the U.S. Now as for a Multi-Core/Multi-CPU setup, that would cost you considerably more. Especially if you want more then 2 Multi-Core CPU's. pricewatch.com is a great place to judge prices (again, in the U.S.) HTH, C- ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Need to compile kernel for 2 or more processors?
On 5 December 2010 12:39, Jorge Biquez jbiq...@intranet.com.mx wrote: Hello all. Hello. I hope this question does not sound so stupid. I am sorry in advance. Well, that's life. I guess that actually we do not have to change the kernel so all processors can be seen? Am I right ? http://svn.freebsd.org/viewvc/base/releng/7.3/sys/i386/conf/GENERIC?revision=203736view=markup or http://tinyurl.com/28km4fc shows that --- # To make an SMP kernel, the next two lines are needed options SMP # Symmetric MultiProcessor Kernel device apic# I/O APIC --- is part of GENERIC on 7.3, ergo you needn't recompile to enjoy multiple processing joy in all(most of) its glory. HTH -- -- ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
FreeBSD 8.0, HyperV and non-uniform processors.
Is this warning as harmful as it sounds: WARNING: Non-uniform processors. WARNING: Using suboptimal topology. More info: CPU: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E7330 @ 2.40GHz (2304.83-MHz 686-class CPU) ACPI APIC Table: VRTUAL MICROSFT FreeBSD/SMP: Multiprocessor System Detected: 2 CPUs FreeBSD/SMP: 0 package(s) x 4 core(s) cpu0 (BSP): APIC ID: 0 cpu1 (AP): APIC ID: 1 WARNING: Non-uniform processors. WARNING: Using suboptimal topology. Unfortunately I am forced to use this setup. Is there anything I can do? Should I even be worried? Thanks. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: FreeBSD 8.0, HyperV and non-uniform processors.
Hi--
On Jan 11, 2010, at 10:43 AM, Paul Halliday wrote:
Is this warning as harmful as it sounds:
WARNING: Non-uniform processors.
WARNING: Using suboptimal topology.
More info:
CPU: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E7330 @ 2.40GHz (2304.83-MHz 686-class
CPU)
ACPI APIC Table: VRTUAL MICROSFT
FreeBSD/SMP: Multiprocessor System Detected: 2 CPUs
FreeBSD/SMP: 0 package(s) x 4 core(s)
cpu0 (BSP): APIC ID: 0
cpu1 (AP): APIC ID: 1
WARNING: Non-uniform processors.
WARNING: Using suboptimal topology.
Unfortunately I am forced to use this setup. Is there anything I can
do? Should I even be worried?
This comes from the SMP probing code in i386/i386/mp_machdep.c (and similar for
amd64):
if (mp_ncpus % (cpu_cores * cpu_logical) != 0) {
printf(WARNING: Non-uniform processors.\n);
printf(WARNING: Using suboptimal topology.\n);
return (smp_topo_none());
}
smp_topo_none() means that the system assumes none of the L1/L2 cache levels
are shared; for a virtual machine, this is probably correct, so you should not
be unduly concerned.
--
-Chuck
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Processors
On Tuesday 12 May 2009 06:01:13 Peter Ulrich Kruppa wrote: Am Montag, den 11.05.2009, 19:11 -0400 schrieb Glen Barber: On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 7:04 PM, Wojciech Puchar woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote: yes. FreeBSD/amd64 Or i386. if you want limited system - yes If by 'limited' you mean being able to use nVidia drivers, that's not very 'limited' to me. Please do correct me: Only Graphic Cards by nVidia are a problem on amd64, everything else can be run via OpenSource drivers (?!) Greetings Uli. Yea, go ahead and use nv (or some other FOSS) driver, so that the hardware that you payed more than 100 bux for goes unused. -- Ghirai. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Processors
Ghirai wrote: On Tuesday 12 May 2009 06:01:13 Peter Ulrich Kruppa wrote: Am Montag, den 11.05.2009, 19:11 -0400 schrieb Glen Barber: On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 7:04 PM, Wojciech Puchar woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote: yes. FreeBSD/amd64 Or i386. if you want limited system - yes If by 'limited' you mean being able to use nVidia drivers, that's not very 'limited' to me. Please do correct me: Only Graphic Cards by nVidia are a problem on amd64, everything else can be run via OpenSource drivers (?!) Greetings Uli. Has anyone used the Nouveau driver? I tried nv awhile on AMD64, but my eForce 8600 GTS 512MB could not even do full screen dvd playback without choking(it was dual head but still...). I don't really need much more performance than that, so if anyone has had a good experience please share. I don't really feel like farking w/ xorg.conf for another 2 days. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Processors
Hi, I'm new with FreeBSD setup. Just want to as if Core 2 Duo processor compatible with FreeBSD. Thanks a lot.. -- Renato A. Rocabo mobile: 09208095152 email: cserge...@gmail.com ym: carlos_serge...@yahoo.com skype: rrocabo If you don't write it down, then it never happen ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Processors
I'm new with FreeBSD setup. Just want to as if Core 2 Duo processor compatible with FreeBSD. yes it is. Olivier ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Processors
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 5:48 AM, Renato A. Rocabo cserge...@gmail.comwrote: Hi, I'm new with FreeBSD setup. Just want to as if Core 2 Duo processor compatible with FreeBSD. Thanks a lot.. -- Renato A. Rocabo mobile: 09208095152 email: cserge...@gmail.com ym: carlos_serge...@yahoo.com skype: rrocabo Welcome to FreeBSD. Since you're new, it's likely that you'll have many such questions regarding hardware compatibility. The link below will take you to the hardware notes for the most recent release (7.2): http://www.freebsd.org/releases/7.2R/hardware.html Best of luck, Andrew ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Processors
I'm new with FreeBSD setup. Just want to as if Core 2 Duo processor compatible with FreeBSD. yes. FreeBSD/amd64 Thanks a lot.. -- Renato A. Rocabo mobile: 09208095152 email: cserge...@gmail.com ym: carlos_serge...@yahoo.com skype: rrocabo If you don't write it down, then it never happen ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Processors
On Tue, 12 May 2009, Wojciech Puchar wrote: I'm new with FreeBSD setup. Just want to as if Core 2 Duo processor compatible with FreeBSD. yes. FreeBSD/amd64 Or i386. -Warren Block * Rapid City, South Dakota USA ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Processors
yes. FreeBSD/amd64 Or i386. if you want limited system - yes -Warren Block * Rapid City, South Dakota USA ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Processors
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 7:04 PM, Wojciech Puchar woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote: yes. FreeBSD/amd64 Or i386. if you want limited system - yes If by 'limited' you mean being able to use nVidia drivers, that's not very 'limited' to me. -- Glen Barber ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Processors
Am Montag, den 11.05.2009, 19:11 -0400 schrieb Glen Barber: On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 7:04 PM, Wojciech Puchar woj...@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl wrote: yes. FreeBSD/amd64 Or i386. if you want limited system - yes If by 'limited' you mean being able to use nVidia drivers, that's not very 'limited' to me. Please do correct me: Only Graphic Cards by nVidia are a problem on amd64, everything else can be run via OpenSource drivers (?!) Greetings Uli. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Processors
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 11:01 PM, Peter Ulrich Kruppa ulr...@pukruppa.net wrote: If by 'limited' you mean being able to use nVidia drivers, that's not very 'limited' to me. Please do correct me: Only Graphic Cards by nVidia are a problem on amd64, everything else can be run via OpenSource drivers (?!) nVidia was just an example. Yes, the nv driver will do the job, but 3D is lacking. -- Glen Barber ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-questions-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: IPsec's use of processors
On Sat, Nov 15, 2008 at 3:15 PM, Patrick Lamaizière [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote: Le Fri, 14 Nov 2008 13:37:58 +0200, Riaan Kruger [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit : I would like to know how IPsec makes use of a multi processor machine? I have gateway (FreeBSD 7.0) with four SAs configured. When testing throughput through the configured SAs, I see (with systat) that only one cpu works really hard (+-10% idle min), two others work a bit (+-70% idle min) and the fourth CPU does pretty much nothing. Is this normal, shouldn't at least the two cpus work hard because of the high throughput? I guess that's because the cryptographic requests are dispatched and done by two kernel threads. The thread 'crypto' dispatches and processes the requests, the thread 'crypto-returns' returns the results. You can see these kernel threads with top S H Regards. Thanx for your reply. So there is one thread to dispatch the crypto operations to the crypto providers and another to get the return. Also if i am using software crypto providers, as supplied per default on FreeBSD, there will be effectively one thread that does the actual symmetric crypto operations. I think this is so because the actual crypto operations in cryptosoft are synchronous and will complete and then return. With hardware crypto providers the crypto thread will pass the operation to the device and return letting the driver of the device call back when it is done. If my above assesment is correct then using the software crypto providers will result in only 1 CPU effectively being used for symmetric encryption. Regards ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: IPsec's use of processors
Le Fri, 14 Nov 2008 13:37:58 +0200, Riaan Kruger [EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit : I would like to know how IPsec makes use of a multi processor machine? I have gateway (FreeBSD 7.0) with four SAs configured. When testing throughput through the configured SAs, I see (with systat) that only one cpu works really hard (+-10% idle min), two others work a bit (+-70% idle min) and the fourth CPU does pretty much nothing. Is this normal, shouldn't at least the two cpus work hard because of the high throughput? I guess that's because the cryptographic requests are dispatched and done by two kernel threads. The thread 'crypto' dispatches and processes the requests, the thread 'crypto-returns' returns the results. You can see these kernel threads with top S H Regards. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
IPsec's use of processors
I would like to know how IPsec makes use of a multi processor machine? I have gateway (FreeBSD 7.0) with four SAs configured. When testing throughput through the configured SAs, I see (with systat) that only one cpu works really hard (+-10% idle min), two others work a bit (+-70% idle min) and the fourth CPU does pretty much nothing. Is this normal, shouldn't at least the two cpus work hard because of the high throughput? I hope i am on the right list. Riaan ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Ports and 64-bit Processors
On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 08:48:24PM +0200, Wojciech Puchar wrote: AFAIK, it is not as much a question of ports being broken, but there are some ports that have 'ONLY_FOR_ARCHS=i386' set, e.g. because they are binary-only ports (e.g. flash plugin, nvidia driver) or because they contain i386 assembly code or because the code contains assumptions that are true on i386 but not on amd64 (like the size of a pointer being equal to the size of an integer). you may just copy binaries onto amd64 system and they will work in 32-bit mode. As long as you also copy the 32-bit libraries that they need! Roland -- R.F.Smith http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/ [plain text _non-HTML_ PGP/GnuPG encrypted/signed email much appreciated] pgp: 1A2B 477F 9970 BA3C 2914 B7CE 1277 EFB0 C321 A725 (KeyID: C321A725) pgpzibqfhNBdc.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Ports and 64-bit Processors
you may just copy binaries onto amd64 system and they will work in 32-bit mode. As long as you also copy the 32-bit libraries that they need! binaries means both. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ports and 64-bit Processors
FreeBSD has supported 64-bit architectures for a while now... Alpha and UltraSPARC come to mind--even if Alpha is no longer a Tier 1 architecture. I'm surprised to hear so many of you say that certain ports are broken on AMD64. I would think if they worked on other 64-bit processors they'd work on AMD64. Were the ports that are broken on AMD64 also broken on those other architectures, too? ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Ports and 64-bit Processors
In response to FreeBSD Questions [EMAIL PROTECTED]: FreeBSD has supported 64-bit architectures for a while now... Alpha and UltraSPARC come to mind--even if Alpha is no longer a Tier 1 architecture. I'm surprised to hear so many of you say that certain ports are broken on AMD64. I would think if they worked on other 64-bit processors they'd work on AMD64. Were the ports that are broken on AMD64 also broken on those other architectures, too? Most of the ports I've had problems with are desktop applications. Stuff that doesn't often get installed/used on 64 bit. It's been a while since we've tried (about 1 year) but Gnome was pretty unstable on 64 bit at the time. Can't say if this is universal across all 64 bit platforms. -- Bill Moran http://www.potentialtech.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Ports and 64-bit Processors
Em Sex, 2008-08-29 às 10:57 -0400, Bill Moran escreveu: In response to FreeBSD Questions [EMAIL PROTECTED]: FreeBSD has supported 64-bit architectures for a while now... Alpha and UltraSPARC come to mind--even if Alpha is no longer a Tier 1 architecture. I'm surprised to hear so many of you say that certain ports are broken on AMD64. I would think if they worked on other 64-bit processors they'd work on AMD64. Were the ports that are broken on AMD64 also broken on those other architectures, too? Most of the ports I've had problems with are desktop applications. Stuff that doesn't often get installed/used on 64 bit. It's been a while since we've tried (about 1 year) but Gnome was pretty unstable on 64 bit at the time. I have had good experiences with gnome 2.22 and amd64 in produtcion systems running on dell poweredge with 4core cpus (4 logical processors) 2Gb of memory, 120 users using gnome, evolution, openoffice-3, epiphany, pidgin, java... postgres servers and a callcenter dial apllication, that needs an asterisk 1.4.21 (on 64 bit too...) runs about 24X7 the machine have somestimes 1200 process running full time alll the clients are thin clients (amd geode, 32 bits, 64mb)... 100 mbits ethernet with NO Backup... uptime is 38 days Yes... it needs more memory... === last pid: 65631; load averages: 0.89, 1.04, 1.07 up 38+05:23:12 12:23:15 824 processes: 1 running, 814 sleeping, 9 stopped CPU states: 2.8% user, 0.0% nice, 1.0% system, 0.5% interrupt, 95.7% idle Mem: 1147M Active, 100M Inact, 601M Wired, 92M Cache, 213M Buf, 12M Free Swap: 8192M Total, 1955M Used, 6237M Free, 23% Inuse, 12K In === we use it in our notebooks too (dell, acer, hp...) several ones about 20... 64 bits amd64 running on amd hardware or D series intel... The 32 bit version we use on the geode hardware.. but stays in the 64 bit machine exported in a nfs... Runs fine... Sergio ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Ports and 64-bit Processors
and UltraSPARC come to mind--even if Alpha is no longer a Tier 1 architecture. I'm surprised to hear so many of you say that certain ports are broken on AMD64. I would think if they worked on other 64-bit processors they'd work on AMD64. Were the ports that are broken on AMD64 also broken on those other architectures, too? no idea. all ports i use are not broken :) ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Ports and 64-bit Processors
On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 10:44:10AM -0400, FreeBSD Questions wrote:
FreeBSD has supported 64-bit architectures for a while now... Alpha
and UltraSPARC come to mind--even if Alpha is no longer a Tier 1
architecture. I'm surprised to hear so many of you say that certain
ports are broken on AMD64.
AFAIK, it is not as much a question of ports being broken, but there are
some ports that have 'ONLY_FOR_ARCHS=i386' set, e.g. because they are
binary-only ports (e.g. flash plugin, nvidia driver) or because they
contain i386 assembly code or because the code contains assumptions that
are true on i386 but not on amd64 (like the size of a pointer being
equal to the size of an integer).
To see which ports are restricted to certain architectures, try the
following command:
find /usr/ports -type f -name Makefile -exec grep -H ONLY_FOR_ARCH {} \;|less
I would think if they worked on other 64-bit processors they'd work on
AMD64. Were the ports that are broken on AMD64 also broken on those
other architectures, too?
--
R.F.Smith http://www.xs4all.nl/~rsmith/
[plain text _non-HTML_ PGP/GnuPG encrypted/signed email much appreciated]
pgp: 1A2B 477F 9970 BA3C 2914 B7CE 1277 EFB0 C321 A725 (KeyID: C321A725)
pgpu8j2C2riZT.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: Ports and 64-bit Processors
Roland Smith writes:
To see which ports are restricted to certain architectures, try the
following command:
find /usr/ports -type f -name Makefile -exec grep -H ONLY_FOR_ARCH {} \;|less
This returned 643 entries, of which 29 listed a reason.
Six of those use assembler code.
122 contain the string linux.
One is listed as alpha only; another, as sparc only.
Robert Huff
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Ports and 64-bit Processors
AFAIK, it is not as much a question of ports being broken, but there are some ports that have 'ONLY_FOR_ARCHS=i386' set, e.g. because they are binary-only ports (e.g. flash plugin, nvidia driver) or because they contain i386 assembly code or because the code contains assumptions that are true on i386 but not on amd64 (like the size of a pointer being equal to the size of an integer). you may just copy binaries onto amd64 system and they will work in 32-bit mode. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Ports and 64-bit Processors
On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 10:34 AM, sergio lenzi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Em Sex, 2008-08-29 às 10:57 -0400, Bill Moran escreveu: In response to FreeBSD Questions [EMAIL PROTECTED]: FreeBSD has supported 64-bit architectures for a while now... Alpha and UltraSPARC come to mind--even if Alpha is no longer a Tier 1 architecture. I'm surprised to hear so many of you say that certain ports are broken on AMD64. I would think if they worked on other 64-bit processors they'd work on AMD64. Were the ports that are broken on AMD64 also broken on those other architectures, too? Most of the ports I've had problems with are desktop applications. Stuff that doesn't often get installed/used on 64 bit. It's been a while since we've tried (about 1 year) but Gnome was pretty unstable on 64 bit at the time. I have had good experiences with gnome 2.22 and amd64 in produtcion systems running on dell poweredge with 4core cpus (4 logical processors) 2Gb of memory, 120 users using gnome, evolution, openoffice-3, epiphany, pidgin, java... postgres servers and a callcenter dial apllication, that needs an asterisk 1.4.21 (on 64 bit too...) runs about 24X7 the machine have somestimes 1200 process running full time alll the clients are thin clients (amd geode, 32 bits, 64mb)... 100 mbits ethernet with NO Backup... uptime is 38 days Yes... it needs more memory... === last pid: 65631; load averages: 0.89, 1.04, 1.07 up 38+05:23:12 12:23:15 824 processes: 1 running, 814 sleeping, 9 stopped CPU states: 2.8% user, 0.0% nice, 1.0% system, 0.5% interrupt, 95.7% idle Mem: 1147M Active, 100M Inact, 601M Wired, 92M Cache, 213M Buf, 12M Free Swap: 8192M Total, 1955M Used, 6237M Free, 23% Inuse, 12K In === we use it in our notebooks too (dell, acer, hp...) several ones about 20... 64 bits amd64 running on amd hardware or D series intel... The 32 bit version we use on the geode hardware.. but stays in the 64 bit machine exported in a nfs... Runs fine... Sergio Hi How do you set up those clients. Im a bit curious ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Still is error in atlas package on 2 machines with athlon processors
Hello! I would like to ask you for help with this issue, because about 4 month ago I tried compile atlas (ports/math/atlas) and today and still with no success. I still obtain the following assertion error: 10 cases: 10 passed, 0 skipped, 0 failed Benchmarking xcllttstF NREPS UPLO Nlda TIMEMFLOPS RESID = = = = 1 Lower100100 0.00203 671.262 6.761073e-03 1 Lower200200 0.01329 811.882 4.470909e-03 1 Lower300300 0.02895 1253.066 2.536267e-03 1 Lower400400 0.06035 1421.975 2.848316e-03 1 Lower500500 0.13054 1282.513 3.074112e-03 1 Lower600600 0.21536 1342.329 2.439888e-03 1 Lower700700 0.31553 1454.058 2.280117e-03 1 Lower800800 0.46786 1463.242 1.895154e-03 1 Lower900900 0.62829 1550.929 1.907595e-03 1 Lower 1000 1000 0.84989 1572.366 2.426128e-03 10 cases: 10 passed, 0 skipped, 0 failed Benchmarking xzllttst NREPS UPLO Nlda TIMEMFLOPS RESID = = = = assertion ATL_zpotrf(CblasColMajor, Uplo, N, A, lda) == 0 failed, line 344 of file ../llttst.c *** Error code 255 Stop in /usr/ports/math/atlas. *** Error code 1 Stop in /usr/ports/math/atlas. I have from dmesg the following processor: FreeBSD 6.3-PRERELEASE #0: Sat Dec 1 18:32:38 CET 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/MYKERNEL Timecounter i8254 frequency 1193182 Hz quality 0 CPU: AMD Athlon(tm) (1240.53-MHz 686-class CPU) Origin = AuthenticAMD Id = 0x681 Stepping = 1 Features=0x383fbffFPU,VME,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,PAE,MCE,CX8,APIC,SEP,MTRR,PGE,MCA,CMOV,PAT,PSE36,MMX,FXSR,SSE AMD Features=0xc0400800SYSCALL,MMX+,3DNow!+,3DNow! real memory = 2147418112 (2047 MB) avail memory = 2088062976 (1991 MB) On similar machine at my work I also obtained similar assertion error. Whats is going on here? Could you help me? It nervous me that this is not working (4 months pass and still not compiling with success), but I don't know why? Maybe it is hardware error? or maybe someone has this same problem? Please for your help and suggestions how to solve this problem. If you need more information I send it to you. I'm sorry for my English. Thank you in advance. Zbigniew ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD with Duel Processors
Martin McCormick wrote: Is there anything special I need to do to make FreeBSD6.2 make use of both CPU's on a Dell 2650 mother board? The boot messages indicate that the OS knows about the 2 CPU's. Is this correct? I heard some rumors that one has to give some sort of kernel directive but I haven't found anything yet. This system will be a secondary DHCP server. Many thanks If FreeBSD 6.2 was installed after the dual-core CPU was there, it would have automatically installed the SMP kernel, so you don't need to create a custom kernel. The easiest way you can check if the support is there by looking at the output of `top`: if there's a column named C and it shows 0 and 1, everything's ok (0 and 1 are the CPUs on which a process is executing). ACPI APIC Table: DELL PE2650 Timecounter i8254 frequency 1193182 Hz quality 0 CPU: Intel(R) XEON(TM) CPU 1.80GHz (1794.19-MHz 686-class CPU) Origin = GenuineIntel Id = 0xf24 Stepping = 4 Features=0x3febfbffFPU,VME,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,PAE,MCE,CX8,APIC,SEP,MTRR,PGE,MCA,CMOV,PAT,PSE36,CLFLUSH,DTS,ACPI,MMX,FXSR,SSE,SSE2,SS,HTT,TM Logical CPUs per core: 2 real memory = 1073676288 (1023 MB) avail memory = 1041784832 (993 MB) Martin McCormick WB5AGZ Stillwater, OK Systems Engineer OSU Information Technology Department Network Operations Group ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: FreeBSD with Duel Processors
--On May 5, 2007 8:49:09 PM -0500 Martin McCormick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is there anything special I need to do to make FreeBSD6.2 make use of both CPU's on a Dell 2650 mother board? Yes. You will need to compile a custom kernel. It could be as simple as adding Option SMP to a GENERIC kernel and then recompiling. See this section of the Handbook: http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/books/handbook/kernelconfig-custom-kernel.html Paul Schmehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Senior Information Security Analyst The University of Texas at Dallas http://www.utdallas.edu/ir/security/
FreeBSD with Duel Processors
Is there anything special I need to do to make FreeBSD6.2 make use of both CPU's on a Dell 2650 mother board? The boot messages indicate that the OS knows about the 2 CPU's. Is this correct? I heard some rumors that one has to give some sort of kernel directive but I haven't found anything yet. This system will be a secondary DHCP server. Many thanks ACPI APIC Table: DELL PE2650 Timecounter i8254 frequency 1193182 Hz quality 0 CPU: Intel(R) XEON(TM) CPU 1.80GHz (1794.19-MHz 686-class CPU) Origin = GenuineIntel Id = 0xf24 Stepping = 4 Features=0x3febfbffFPU,VME,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,PAE,MCE,CX8,APIC,SEP,MTRR,PGE,MCA,CMOV,PAT,PSE36,CLFLUSH,DTS,ACPI,MMX,FXSR,SSE,SSE2,SS,HTT,TM Logical CPUs per core: 2 real memory = 1073676288 (1023 MB) avail memory = 1041784832 (993 MB) Martin McCormick WB5AGZ Stillwater, OK Systems Engineer OSU Information Technology Department Network Operations Group ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
slightly OT | Non-Matching MP processors...
This isn't really a FreeBSD specific problem, but this list has a number of people who administrate multi-CPU servers, so I thought it a logical place to ask. Does anyone else experienced this: Somewhat infrequently, the CPUs of a multi-socket system get out of synch and the BIOS complains about Warning: Non-matching MP processors, (even though the CPU's are an identical, matched pair of AMD Athlon 2200+). I've had this happen on a Tyan K7 S2468 mainboards (Phoenix Bios 4.0 Release 6.0), more than a few times. The problem seems to remedy itself without intervention, eventually, (several restarts later). Is this an issue for anyone else? Does it occur more frequently with more processors (4, 8)? What did you do to resolve or reproduce it? -Modulok- ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Dual core processors
In response to Jeff Mohler [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Is a stock kernel config the 'fast' way to go on these CPUs? Sure wish there was an 'options I_WANNA_GO_FAST' or an 'options RICKY_BOBBY' that would just do all the right things. Still not sure which scheduler to go with.. Unless something has changed very recently, most of the schedulers are considered experimental and have known bugs. The only one that I know is stable is SCHED_4BSD. Apparently, SCHED_ULE has some nice performance improvements when it's not causing panics. If you're not interested/capable in doing kernel debugging, you probably want to go with SCHED_4BSD. It would appear that some day SCHED_ULE will replace it, but not yet. -- Bill Moran Collaborative Fusion Inc. IMPORTANT: This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If the reader of this message is not an intended recipient (or the individual responsible for the delivery of this message to an intended recipient), please be advised that any re-use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is prohibited. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dual core processors
I have a server with 6.1 and one dual-core processor and the SMP option was built in the kernel according to the doc below, but only zeros show up in the 'C' column of top after I've rebooted with the newly compiled kernel. http://www.freebsddiary.org/smp.php I did not add APIC_IO as the doc suggested as it complains the option is invalid, plus I did not do this for my other 5.4 server which shows all processors in top. Both configs have a device of apic, neither has the APIC_IO option. However, the other server is running 2 physical CPU's and I see 0 thru 3 in the C column in top. Also, dmesg shows CPU #1 Launched along with everything else: esmtp# dmesg|grep CPU CPU: Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 3.00GHz (3010.67-MHz 686-class CPU) Logical CPUs per core: 2 FreeBSD/SMP: Multiprocessor System Detected: 2 CPUs cpu0: ACPI CPU on acpi0 acpi_throttle0: ACPI CPU Throttling on cpu0 cpu1: ACPI CPU on acpi0 SMP: AP CPU #1 Launched! Why would I not see any other CPU numbers under top like I do in my other server? -- Robert ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Dual core processors
In response to Robert Fitzpatrick [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I have a server with 6.1 and one dual-core processor and the SMP option was built in the kernel according to the doc below, but only zeros show up in the 'C' column of top after I've rebooted with the newly compiled kernel. http://www.freebsddiary.org/smp.php I did not add APIC_IO as the doc suggested as it complains the option is invalid, plus I did not do this for my other 5.4 server which shows all processors in top. Both configs have a device of apic, neither has the APIC_IO option. However, the other server is running 2 physical CPU's and I see 0 thru 3 in the C column in top. Also, dmesg shows CPU #1 Launched along with everything else: esmtp# dmesg|grep CPU CPU: Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 3.00GHz (3010.67-MHz 686-class CPU) Logical CPUs per core: 2 FreeBSD/SMP: Multiprocessor System Detected: 2 CPUs cpu0: ACPI CPU on acpi0 acpi_throttle0: ACPI CPU Throttling on cpu0 cpu1: ACPI CPU on acpi0 SMP: AP CPU #1 Launched! Why would I not see any other CPU numbers under top like I do in my other server? Based on your dmesg, I don't believe you have a dual-cored CPU. It looks as if it's hyperthreaded, which is different. Hyperthreading is disabled in FreeBSD by default because of possible security issues. It can be enabled by setting a sysctl ... I recommend you do a bit of reading on the sysctl mechanism or it's behaviour might confuse you. -- Bill Moran Collaborative Fusion Inc. IMPORTANT: This message contains confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If the reader of this message is not an intended recipient (or the individual responsible for the delivery of this message to an intended recipient), please be advised that any re-use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is prohibited. Please notify the sender immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and delete this e-mail from your system. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Dual core processors
up in the 'C' column of top after I've rebooted with the newly compiled kernel. Run top with the -S argument. You should then see two idle processes, one for each CPU: 11 root 1 171 52 0K 8K CPU0 0 72.1H 91.70% idle: cpu0 10 root 1 171 52 0K 8K RUN1 72.2H 90.97% idle: cpu1 Can you confirm whether you see that or not? I do not have APIC_IO in my kernel either, and it is showing both cores in top (Core 2 Duo CPU). Regards, Josh ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Dual core processors
On Tue, 2006-11-14 at 15:04 -0800, Josh Carroll wrote: up in the 'C' column of top after I've rebooted with the newly compiled kernel. Run top with the -S argument. You should then see two idle processes, one for each CPU: 11 root 1 171 52 0K 8K CPU0 0 72.1H 91.70% idle: cpu0 10 root 1 171 52 0K 8K RUN1 72.2H 90.97% idle: cpu1 Can you confirm whether you see that or not? I do not have APIC_IO in my kernel either, and it is showing both cores in top (Core 2 Duo CPU). Thanks, yes, I see both cpu0 and cpu1 and cpu1 is 100% idle compared to cpu0 only 45-50% idle at this time. I did some googling for hyperthreadin after reading Bill's response and checked sysctl to find these settings: esmtp# sysctl machdep.hlt_logical_cpus machdep.hlt_logical_cpus: 0 esmtp# sysctl machdep.smp_cpus sysctl: unknown oid 'machdep.smp_cpus' esmtp# sysctl machdep.hlt_cpus machdep.hlt_cpus: 2 Looks like my hyperthreading is enabled and it is in the BIOS. I was told there was a dual-core in the machine, but not confirmed. But there should be two with HT anyway as seen, correct? -- Robert ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Dual core processors
On 11/15/06, Robert Fitzpatrick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Looks like my hyperthreading is enabled and it is in the BIOS. I was told there was a dual-core in the machine, but not confirmed. But there should be two with HT anyway as seen, correct? This is a dmesg from an Intel D830 box: CPU: Genuine Intel(R) CPU 3.20GHz (3217.43-MHz 686-class CPU) Origin = GenuineIntel Id = 0xf47 Stepping = 7 Features=0xbfebfbffFPU,VME,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,PAE,MCE,CX8,APIC,SEP,MTRR,PGE,MCA,CMOV,PAT,P SE36,CLFLUSH,DTS,ACPI,MMX,FXSR,SSE,SSE2,SS,HTT,TM,PBE Features2=0x649dSSE3,RSVD2,MON,DS_CPL,EST,CNTX-ID,CX16,b14 AMD Features=0x2010NX,LM AMD Features2=0x1LAHF Cores per package: 2 I think you do have a single processor with hyperthreading (logical CPUs) and not a dual-core model. To get hyperthreading up and running, you need to add: machdep.hyperthreading_allowed=1 to /etc/sysctl.conf or change it manually. Please google for the security implications of doing this first though. -- Juha http://www.geekzone.co.nz/juha ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Dual core processors
My dmesg matches yours Juha.. Would enabling Hyperthreading increase any of my processing power? On 11/14/06, Juha Saarinen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 11/15/06, Robert Fitzpatrick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Looks like my hyperthreading is enabled and it is in the BIOS. I was told there was a dual-core in the machine, but not confirmed. But there should be two with HT anyway as seen, correct? This is a dmesg from an Intel D830 box: CPU: Genuine Intel(R) CPU 3.20GHz (3217.43-MHz 686-class CPU) Origin = GenuineIntel Id = 0xf47 Stepping = 7 Features=0xbfebfbffFPU,VME,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,PAE,MCE,CX8,APIC,SEP,MTRR,PGE,MCA,CMOV,PAT,P SE36,CLFLUSH,DTS,ACPI,MMX,FXSR,SSE,SSE2,SS,HTT,TM,PBE Features2=0x649dSSE3,RSVD2,MON,DS_CPL,EST,CNTX-ID,CX16,b14 AMD Features=0x2010NX,LM AMD Features2=0x1LAHF Cores per package: 2 I think you do have a single processor with hyperthreading (logical CPUs) and not a dual-core model. To get hyperthreading up and running, you need to add: machdep.hyperthreading_allowed=1 to /etc/sysctl.conf or change it manually. Please google for the security implications of doing this first though. -- Juha http://www.geekzone.co.nz/juha ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Dual core processors
On 11/15/06, Jeff Mohler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My dmesg matches yours Juha.. Would enabling Hyperthreading increase any of my processing power? Well, if you have the D830, no, because it doesn't have HTT support. :) As a general question, the answer is yes and no. Depends on your application basically, as well as the operating system itself. It's one of those questions that'll lead to long and detailed flame wars, unfortunately. -- Juha http://www.geekzone.co.nz/juha ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Dual core processors
On 2006/11/14 15:13, Jeff Mohler seems to have typed: My dmesg matches yours Juha.. Would enabling Hyperthreading increase any of my processing power? It depends on load and so forth, most reports I saw vary from a minimal increase to a large decrease. The first few links from a google search return: http://librenix.com/?inode=3837 http://www.2cpu.com/articles/43_3.html ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Dual core processors
I thought that since we both had HTT tags in the CPU ID, that we had it. ;) On 11/14/06, Juha Saarinen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 11/15/06, Jeff Mohler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My dmesg matches yours Juha.. Would enabling Hyperthreading increase any of my processing power? Well, if you have the D830, no, because it doesn't have HTT support. :) As a general question, the answer is yes and no. Depends on your application basically, as well as the operating system itself. It's one of those questions that'll lead to long and detailed flame wars, unfortunately. -- Juha http://www.geekzone.co.nz/juha ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Dual core processors
On 11/15/06, Jeff Mohler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I thought that since we both had HTT tags in the CPU ID, that we had it. Yeah, well... that's a funny thing that tag. Got it on my first-generation 1.3GHz Pentium 4 as well. Makes me wonder if Intel had that feature in the processors very early on, but only enabled it in the later cores. -- Juha http://www.geekzone.co.nz/juha ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Dual core processors
Is a stock kernel config the 'fast' way to go on these CPUs? Sure wish there was an 'options I_WANNA_GO_FAST' or an 'options RICKY_BOBBY' that would just do all the right things. Still not sure which scheduler to go with.. On 11/14/06, Juha Saarinen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 11/15/06, Jeff Mohler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I thought that since we both had HTT tags in the CPU ID, that we had it. Yeah, well... that's a funny thing that tag. Got it on my first-generation 1.3GHz Pentium 4 as well. Makes me wonder if Intel had that feature in the processors very early on, but only enabled it in the later cores. -- Juha http://www.geekzone.co.nz/juha ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Processors
On 9/15/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To whom it may concern I have a computer with a dual-core processor. Will FreeBSD operate on this machine? Yes, of course. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processors
To whom it may concern I have a computer with a dual-core processor. Will FreeBSD operate on this machine? Please answer this at my e-mail address [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) . (short and sweet will suffice) Thank you Bill Wilson ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Processors
well, without more information. I can definitively say maybe FreeBSD works just fine on many multi-cpu machines. On 9/15/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To whom it may concern I have a computer with a dual-core processor. Will FreeBSD operate on this machine? Please answer this at my e-mail address [EMAIL PROTECTED] (mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]) . (short and sweet will suffice) Thank you Bill Wilson ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- I'm nerdy in the extreme and whiter than sour cream ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Support for 80386 processors (the I386_CPU kernel configuration option)
Hello. I quoted the subject of the email directly from the kernel changes section of the FreeBSD/i386-RELEASE release notes. I am not sure if I am reading this correctly, but does this mean that people who have Intel-based processors (such as P4 and Celeron) should not use 6.0 and only use 5.4? I want to intsall FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE on a Celeron and a P4, and to the best of my knowledge they are i386 processors (80386). If someone could clear this up I would appreciate it. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Support for 80386 processors (the I386_CPU kernel configuration option)
On 2006-01-09 09:58, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello. I quoted the subject of the email directly from the kernel changes section of the FreeBSD/i386-RELEASE release notes. I am not sure if I am reading this correctly, but does this mean that people who have Intel-based processors (such as P4 and Celeron) should not use 6.0 and only use 5.4? Of course, not! It means that 486 and latter processors are supported. I want to intsall FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE on a Celeron and a P4, and to the best of my knowledge they are i386 processors (80386). You are referring to a processor family. The release notes refer to a particular CPU/processor type. I'm running 7.0-CURRENT on a Celeron system at home. You shouldn't have problems running any version on your CPU, from 4.X, to 5.4 or 5-STABLE, or evel 6.X. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Support for 80386 processors (the I386_CPU kernel configuration option)
On Mon, Jan 09, 2006 at 09:58:20AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello. I quoted the subject of the email directly from the kernel changes section of the FreeBSD/i386-RELEASE release notes. I am not sure if I am reading this correctly, but does this mean that people who have Intel-based processors (such as P4 and Celeron) should not use 6.0 and only use 5.4? I want to intsall FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE on a Celeron and a P4, and to the best of my knowledge they are i386 processors (80386). If someone could clear this up I would appreciate it. No, P4 and Celeron are not 80386 processors. They are descended from the 80386 and belong to the i386 *family* of processors, which is a slightly different thing. What has been removed from 6.0 is the ability to run on an *actual* 80386 CPU. They were state of the art in the late 80's, but that is a while ago. If your computer has a clock frequency of 50 MHz or more, it is almost certainly not using a real 80386. (If I remember correctly they were only available in speeds ranging from 16 MHz to 40 MHz.) FreeBSD 6.0 should run fine on any Intel CPU from the original Pentium and onwards. (Also on an 80486, if it has an hardware FPU - either built in or external.) -- Insert your favourite quote here. Erik Trulsson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Support for 80386 processors (the I386_CPU kernel configuration
Please break your lines at around 70 characters. It makes it much easier for people with text based Email readers to read and respond to your posts. Hello. I quoted the subject of the email directly from the kernel changes section of the FreeBSD/i386-RELEASE release notes. I am not sure if I am reading this correctly, but does this mean that people who have Intel-based processors (such as P4 and Celeron) should not use 6.0 and only use 5.4? I want to intsall FreeBSD 6.0-RELEASE on a Celeron and a P4, and to the best of my knowledge they are i386 processors (80386). If someone could clear this up I would appreciate it. No. You should use 6.0. i386 is just a generic name for the whole class of processors that have followed Intel's i386 line, starting with the 80386 and everything afterward.P4, P5, P6 and etc all are part of this line. jerry ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dual-core processors and FreeBSD 6.0
Hello, I would like to know if FreeBSD 6.0 supports dual-core CPU chips. Note, dual-core is different from dual CPU. On Jun. 13, 2005 PT Wired magazine explained a dual-core CPU as the following in a article titled The New Chips on the Block A dual-core processor differs from a single-core chip in that it has two physical computer processing unit, or CPU, cores on a single die. Link here: http://www.wired.com/news/infostructure/0,1377,67795,00.html -Justin Franks Ph: 415.261.0706 Fx: 925-935-6096 http://www.inetassociation.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Dual-core processors and FreeBSD 6.0
On Thu, 2005-12-15 at 18:57 -0800, Justin Franks wrote: Hello, I would like to know if FreeBSD 6.0 supports dual-core CPU chips. Yes Note, dual-core is different from dual CPU. On Jun. 13, 2005 PT Wired magazine explained a dual-core CPU as the following in a article titled The New Chips on the Block A dual-core processor differs from a single-core chip in that it has two physical computer processing unit, or CPU, cores on a single die. Link here: http://www.wired.com/news/infostructure/0,1377,67795,00.html That googling energy should have been saved by visiting freebsd.org http://www.freebsd.org/platforms/amd64.html -Justin Franks Ph: 415.261.0706 Fx: 925-935-6096 http://www.inetassociation.com ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Dev Tugnait [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nocona Processors
I have an Intel Xeon nocona processor. I noticed when I set the CPU type that bsd.cpu.mk still thinks it's an AMD processor (per the old make.conf example file). I was able to change this in the system area and in the recently downloaded release src version and build a running system with -march=nocona and build all the ports with it. This should probably be addressed, but on to the question.. Are there plans to allow for 4 GB processes on these systems? -- Michael Conlen ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Nocona Processors
when you boot up does the kernel pick up the processor as a nocona or prescott? or just an amd64? -Ben Michael Conlen wrote: I have an Intel Xeon nocona processor. I noticed when I set the CPU type that bsd.cpu.mk still thinks it's an AMD processor (per the old make.conf example file). I was able to change this in the system area and in the recently downloaded release src version and build a running system with -march=nocona and build all the ports with it. This should probably be addressed, but on to the question.. Are there plans to allow for 4 GB processes on these systems? -- Michael Conlen ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Processors
I might have missed it in the long amount of FAQ pages. Is FreeBSD only for 64bit processors. If so can we set up a Donations to Brach Janney so that he may use our operating system page. =) Thankyou for your time. And here is a place to send any info you might have that is not posted on the web page. Brach Janney Age 16 5367 Cherokee Dr nw North Canton, Ohio 44720 -until we meet again, ado- Brach Janney _ Dream of owning a home? Find out how in the First-time Home Buying Guide. http://special.msn.com/home/firsthome.armx ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Processors
On Sat, Feb 28, 2004 at 05:56:38PM -0500, Brach Janney wrote: I might have missed it in the long amount of FAQ pages. Is FreeBSD only for 64bit processors. If so can we set up a Donations to Brach Janney so that he may use our operating system page. =) Thankyou for your time. No, it runs on 32-bit Intel i386 machines (regular PCs) also. Kris pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
RE: Processors
Hi dude, FreeBSD is ALSO available for 64bit systems, like AMD64 etc, but also for normal personal computers. Like the ones i am using i386 architecture. So i am sorry but you are not going to have donations to brach janney :):) Cheers :) -- Kind regards, Remko Lodder Elvandar.org/DSINet.org www.mostly-harmless.nl Dutch community for helping newcomers on the hackerscene mrtg.grunn.org Dutch mirror of MRTG -Oorspronkelijk bericht- Van: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Brach Janney Verzonden: zaterdag 28 februari 2004 23:57 Aan: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Onderwerp: Processors I might have missed it in the long amount of FAQ pages. Is FreeBSD only for 64bit processors. If so can we set up a Donations to Brach Janney so that he may use our operating system page. =) Thankyou for your time. And here is a place to send any info you might have that is not posted on the web page. Brach Janney Age 16 5367 Cherokee Dr nw North Canton, Ohio 44720 -until we meet again, ado- Brach Janney _ Dream of owning a home? Find out how in the First-time Home Buying Guide. http://special.msn.com/home/firsthome.armx ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Processors
Brach Janney wrote:
I might have missed it in the long amount of FAQ pages.
Is FreeBSD only for 64bit processors. If so can we set up a
Donations to Brach Janney so that he may use our operating system page.
=)
Thank you for your time.
And here is a place to send any info you might have that is not posted
on the web page.
Brach Janney
Age 16
5367 Cherokee Dr nw
North Canton, Ohio 44720
-until we meet again, ado-
Brach Janney
;-)
If you:
Use FreeBSD to set up a hosting service,
charge your customers, and save your
profits
OR:
Package your own distribution of
FreeBSD and provide technical support
for your money-paying clientele at $X.00
per call and save your profits
OR:
{insert $strategy here}
You might be able to afford that 64-bit
box a bit sooner. Good luck! :-D
More seriously, you might want to
read the FreeBSD handbook:
http://www.freebsd.org/handbook
--- it will tell you a lot about FreeBSD;
it includes the following statement:
FreeBSD is a 4.4BSD-Lite based
operating system for the Intel
architecture (x86) and DEC Alpha
based systems. Ports to other
architectures are also underway.
My first FreeBSD machine was a
233MHz Pentium with an ancient
hard drive. You can learn a lot,
that is, tons from involvement
with this OS. Maybe you're up to
it? If so, welcome to FBSD-land!
Kevin Kinsey
DaleCo, S.P.
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD Processors
On Fri, Jan 02, 2004 at 03:53:30PM -0800, Sal Aldana wrote: I was wondering which AMD Processors are compatible with FreeBSD. I have a Athlon XP 2700 and wanted to know if it would work. I was also going to build a Dual Processor machine using Athlon MP Processors. If any of these work could you let me know before I decide to use FreeBSD. Thank you for your time. Both of those CPUs work fine in FreeBSD. Josh Paetzel ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD Processors
On Fri, Jan 02, 2004 at 07:03:58PM -0800, Mike Maltese wrote: For the kernel configuration you can even optimize the compilation for such processors (5.x only) : options CPU_ATHLON_SSE_HACK options CPU_ENABLE_SSE These are also valid kernel options for 4.x. Where are these documented? -- They that would give up essential liberty for temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -- Benjamin Franklin ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD Processors
options CPU_ATHLON_SSE_HACK options CPU_ENABLE_SSE These are also valid kernel options for 4.x. Where are these documented? /usr/src/sys/i386/conf/LINT ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD Processors
/sys/i386/conf/NOTESon 5.x Mike Maltese wrote: options CPU_ATHLON_SSE_HACK options CPU_ENABLE_SSE These are also valid kernel options for 4.x. Where are these documented? /usr/src/sys/i386/conf/LINT ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
AMD Processors
I was wondering which AMD Processors are compatible with FreeBSD. I have a Athlon XP 2700 and wanted to know if it would work. I was also going to build a Dual Processor machine using Athlon MP Processors. If any of these work could you let me know before I decide to use FreeBSD. Thank you for your time. _ Take advantage of our limited-time introductory offer for dial-up Internet access. http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD Processors
On Friday 02 January 2004 03:53 pm, Sal Aldana wrote: I was wondering which AMD Processors are compatible with FreeBSD. I have a Athlon XP 2700 and wanted to know if it would work. I was also going to build a Dual Processor machine using Athlon MP Processors. If any of these work could you let me know before I decide to use FreeBSD. Thank you for your time. Since they really think they are improved 686's, why wouldn't you expect them to work :). FWIW, I have 4 XP's running 4-stable and 5-current but no MP modles. Kkent -- Kent Stewart Richland, WA http://users.owt.com/kstewart/index.html ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD Processors
Here are the 4.9 hardware specs: http://www.freebsd.org/releases/4.9R/hardware-i386.html Here are the 5.1 specs: http://www.freebsd.org/releases/5.1R/hardware-i386.html --- Sal Aldana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was wondering which AMD Processors are compatible with FreeBSD. I have a Athlon XP 2700 and wanted to know if it would work. I was also going to build a Dual Processor machine using Athlon MP Processors. If any of these work could you let me know before I decide to use FreeBSD. Thank you for your time. _ Take advantage of our limited-time introductory offer for dial-up Internet access. http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] = ESCape with VI. Cheese A La mode. __ Do you Yahoo!? Find out what made the Top Yahoo! Searches of 2003 http://search.yahoo.com/top2003 ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD Processors
My 2600+ overclocked doesn't complain on the 5.2 (worked also with 4.9) Don't worry I don't use it a production server ;) For the kernel configuration you can even optimize the compilation for such processors (5.x only) : options CPU_ATHLON_SSE_HACK options CPU_ENABLE_SSE and also a special cpu type in the make.conf /CPUTYPE?=athlon-xp/ I would think that the second one (CPUTYPE) is more critical than the first set of options (more multimedia oriented). Dany peter lageotakes wrote: Here are the 4.9 hardware specs: http://www.freebsd.org/releases/4.9R/hardware-i386.html Here are the 5.1 specs: http://www.freebsd.org/releases/5.1R/hardware-i386.html --- Sal Aldana [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was wondering which AMD Processors are compatible with FreeBSD. I have a Athlon XP 2700 and wanted to know if it would work. I was also going to build a Dual Processor machine using Athlon MP Processors. If any of these work could you let me know before I decide to use FreeBSD. Thank you for your time. _ Take advantage of our limited-time introductory offer for dial-up Internet access. http://join.msn.com/?page=dept/dialup ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] = ESCape with VI. Cheese A La mode. __ Do you Yahoo!? Find out what made the Top Yahoo! Searches of 2003 http://search.yahoo.com/top2003 ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: AMD Processors
For the kernel configuration you can even optimize the compilation for such processors (5.x only) : options CPU_ATHLON_SSE_HACK options CPU_ENABLE_SSE These are also valid kernel options for 4.x. ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
