[Ukfreebsd] [FreeBSD-Announce] FreeBSD Status Report January-March, 2010 (fwd)
rwatson at FreeBSD.org
Fri Apr 23 21:37:41 BST 2010
On Fri, 23 Apr 2010, Sevan / Venture37 wrote:
>>> Are there any plans for reviving FreeBSD/sun4v??
>> I'm not aware of active work in this area, although the sparc64 folks are
>> clearly getting stuff done on related architectures. I'm not sure what it
>> would take to motivate further improvement on sun4v: the basic port
>> appeared to work moderately well but there were stability issues relating
>> to VM, and I think it wasn't yet able to run as a logical domain (perhaps
>> have the wrong terminology). So there's a very strong starting point for
>> anyone who wanted to pick this up as a project, but no active hands
>> currently I think.
> It would be really good to see it up & running properly, what's the maximum
> number of cores the freebsd kernel has been tested on? The OpenBSD guys
> really ran with the support for this platform, the support for logical
> domains was really cool, being able to mix operating systems on a single box
> is very impressive, though one thing I don't get is why is a sun4v a
> seperate platform on FreeBSD & a part of sparc64 in OpenBSD??
While I have great respect for the OpenBSD folk, I don't think a non-parallel
kernel can be considered to "really run" on sun4v, stable or otherwise.
There's little point in having 64 hardware threads if your kernel can only run
on one at a time, especially with network-centric workloads. My on-going work
on network stack scalability for Juniper is targeted at 16-core amd64 servers
and 32-thread MIPS network appliance parts (I'm using RMI/NetLogicMicro XLS
and XLR). You can read a bit about it here:
The goal is to effectively utilize 16 cores or 32 threads in concurrent TCP
processing with at least 10gbps, and ideally 20gbps.
More information about the Ukfreebsd