Hi.
At this time ULE scheduler uses hardclock() ticks via sched_tick() to
estimate threads CPU load. That strictly limits it's best possible
precision and that is one more reason to call hardclock() on every HZ
tick, even when there is no callouts scheduled.
I've made a patch to get CPU
On 3/8/12 7:08 PM, Sean Bruno wrote:
I'm trying to decide if I should cram mfid for mfi(4) controllers into
the src tree or if we should package it up into a ports package. I
suspect that either one is acceptible, but it seems to make more sense
to put it into the src tree since mfiutil is
Hi all,
I've been playing around with IPv6 networking on FreeBSD release 8.2 and
found that there seems to be no strong incoming host model as specified in
RFC 1122.
I've spotted that in IPv4 there is the sysctl net.inet.ip.check_interface
which defaults to set, but I've been unable to find any
I'll give it a try, thanks.
On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 8:27 AM, Dr. Baud drb...@yahoo.com wrote:
Are the build-in variables cpu and curcpu supported in a 8.1-RELEASE
DTrace?
Dr.
Unfortunately not. However, you can approximate them with (IIRC)
curthread-td_oncpu.
On 09/03/2012 11:52, Damien Fleuriot wrote:
On 3/8/12 7:08 PM, Sean Bruno wrote:
I'm trying to decide if I should cram mfid for mfi(4) controllers into
the src tree or if we should package it up into a ports package. I
suspect that either one is acceptible, but it seems to make more sense
to
On 3/9/12 5:53 PM, Vincent Hoffman wrote:
On 09/03/2012 11:52, Damien Fleuriot wrote:
On 3/8/12 7:08 PM, Sean Bruno wrote:
I'm trying to decide if I should cram mfid for mfi(4) controllers into
the src tree or if we should package it up into a ports package. I
suspect that either one is
On 3/9/2012 7:02 AM, Alex Yong wrote:
I've been playing around with IPv6 networking on FreeBSD release 8.2 and
found that there seems to be no strong incoming host model as specified in
RFC 1122.
First, you're infinitely more likely to get a useful response if you
send your message to
7 matches
Mail list logo
