On 09.11.2010 11:56, David Naylor wrote: > Hi, > > I was reading through cpufreq(4) and in the bugs section it mentions that per > core (or CPU) frequency control is not supported. That all cores/CPUs have > to > be at the same speed. > > What is the reason for that? > > Is it an infrastructure problem with FreeBSD or has it just not been > implemented? > > And how will the recent work on event timers (and a "tickless" kernel) impact > on this problem?
You did read the "symmetric" part of "symmetric multi processor" didn't you?
It's a limitation of the technology. One clock.
//Svein
--
--------+-------------------+-------------------------------
/"\ |Svein Skogen | sv...@d80.iso100.no
\ / |Solberg Østli 9 | PGP Key: 0xE5E76831
X |2020 Skedsmokorset | sv...@jernhuset.no
/ \ |Norway | PGP Key: 0xCE96CE13
| | sv...@stillbilde.net
ascii | | PGP Key: 0x58CD33B6
ribbon |System Admin | svein-listm...@stillbilde.net
Campaign|stillbilde.net | PGP Key: 0x22D494A4
+-------------------+-------------------------------
|msn messenger: | Mobile Phone: +47 907 03 575
|sv...@jernhuset.no | RIPE handle: SS16503-RIPE
--------+-------------------+-------------------------------
A: Because it fouls the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?
------------------------------------------------------------
Picture Gallery:
https://gallery.stillbilde.net/v/svein/
------------------------------------------------------------
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
