Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.bhp.com.au!mel.dit.csiro.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!paladin.american.edu!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!usc!sdd.hp.com!hamblin.math.byu.edu!park.uvsc.edu!usenet
From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc,comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc,comp.unix.solaris
Subject: Re: ISP hardware/software choices (performance comparison)
Date: 20 Jan 1996 22:26:00 GMT
Organization: Utah Valley State College, Orem, Utah
Lines: 77
Distribution: inet
Message-ID: <4drq5o$1o2@park.uvsc.edu>
References: <4cmopu$d35@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu> <4cv8j1$59k@park.uvsc.edu> <4d37d4$j0l@gremlin.backfire.mn.org> <DL29Az.Ax2@ftel.co.uk> <DL3Bv8.22H@ritz.mordor.com> <bryDL3wpx.4o@netcom.com> <4dh0lu$rnv@park.uvsc.edu> <bryDLD1JD.M8B@netcom.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: hecate.artisoft.com
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.unix.bsd.netbsd.misc:2074 comp.unix.bsd.bsdi.misc:2230 comp.unix.solaris:57983
bry@netcom.com (Bryan Althaus) wrote:
]
] Terry Lambert (terry@lambert.org) wrote:
] : bry@netcom.com (Bryan Althaus) wrote:
] : ] Last I heard FreeBSD doesn't handle SMP which would do Sun
] : ] alot of good selling multi-cpu machines. Not to mention Cray.
]
] : This sentence, other than the incorrect statement about FreeBSD
] : and SMP, is gramatically unparsable.
]
] Since your not a machine, I'm sure *you* could parse it. Notice below
] is the sentence I was talking about.
I honestly couldn't tell if you were saying that FreeBSD was not
an option for Sun because they sell SMP boxes, or if you were
saying an SMP FreeBSD would be bad for Sun because Intel SMP
machines are a lot cheaper (near commodity pricing).
] Last I heard FreeBSD doesn't handle SMP without hacking the
] code yourself or having Terry Lambert to build the kernel for
] you. Without support for SMP in their OS it would be of little
] value to Sun in selling multi-cpu machines which benefit greatly
] from use of multiple CPU's. Not to mention Cray which
] ships Sparc based on 32+ Sparc CPU's.
OK. That's a bit less ambiguous.
I have to say that I've only updated the patches for some kernel
architecture changes. I did not originate the code. Other than
a missing header file, the patches apply cleanly to a distribution
very similar to the CDROM before last.
Part of the install process for Solaris x86 (the last time I
played with such an install was between Christmas and New Year's)
requires a series of patch installations. So your "you must hack
code yourself" is either an exageration or it's equally usable as
a Solaris deficiency.
I have to agree that this wouldn't help Sun much, in any case,
since the 1.1.5.1 SPARC port that was completed just before
the USL/UCB agreement was rendered mostly unusable by a side
agreement with USL to stave off a seperate lawsuit.
Without a version that runs on SPARC hardware, Sun would have
nothing to run.
Luckily, I never suggested that Sun dump Solaris in favor of
FreeBSD.
] : If you need the patches and are willing to work on the code, I
] : will forward them to you.
]
] : You will need a CVS tree (available via SUP from ftp.FreeBSD.ORG)
] : to be able to check out the 28 Oct 1994 source tree against which
] : the patches apply (that's right: FreeBSD has had SMP since 1994).
]
] : I can send you more recent patches against -current if you are
] : willing to hack on locore.s GDT initialization.
]
] Just tell me where I can buy a CD-ROM with *BSD on it that supports
] SMP on Intel, Sparc, and PowerPC out of the box. Actually I'll make
] it easier, tell me where I can buy a CD-ROM with *BSD on it that supports
] SMP on any platform. This should be no problem if its been in there
] since 1994.
]
] I also take the Linux SMP CD-ROM ;)
I don't know if the patches were in the "experimental" section on
the last CDROM set or not. I expect them to be on the next one.
Regards,
Terry Lambert
terry@cs.weber.edu
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.