Random x86-64 seg-fault finally fixed
Matthew Dillon
dillon at apollo.backplane.com
Thu Dec 23 10:23:15 PST 2010
:Just out of curiosity, are there any plans for supporting
:machines with 64 cores or even more?
:
:For example, the Sun Fire X4800 (quite common in larger data
:centers) supports eight Xeon 7500 packages which have eight
:cores plus hyperthreading, which gives a 128-way SMP system.
:Solaris, Linux and Windows support them, but I don't think
:any of the BSDs does.
:
:And that's certainly not the end. 256-way x86 systems have
:been announced already. Basically, it seems that the growth
:of the number of cores has taken over the role of the growth
:of clockrate (because the latter starts to face physical
:limits).
:
:Best regards
: Oliver
The basic limitation here for us the convenience of being able to
operate atomically on cpu masks and in particular being able to
run bit-search instructions on them (bsfq, etc). There are also
a few places where I combine cpu masking operations with a spin
lock, which is ultra convenient. I would have to rewrite those
algorithms to operate on an array of cpu masks instead of just one.
It isn't in the cards right now though if someone threw a 128-way
box onto my carpet I'd probably start working on it :-)
Taking x86-64 to 63 cpus was easy because we have 64-bit bit
instructions. I'm stealing a bit in the cpumask for a pmap
spinlock, or it would be 64.
Beyond that it probably makes sense to consider partitioning the
hardware with or without virtualization. Partitioning is already
desireable for the current 48-core monster and I'd like to have
some sort of DragonFly host & guest solution that runs at full
performance on the bare HW without virtualization.
-Matt
More information about the Users
mailing list