LinuxQuestions.org
View the Most Wanted LQ Wiki articles.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware
User Name
Password
Slackware This Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.

Notices



Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 06-29-2008, 02:54 AM   #1
Woodsman
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Distribution: Slackware 14.1
Posts: 3,482

Rep: Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534
SMP Kernel On Old CPUs?


Pat V. recommends using the SMP kernel even on single core CPUs. Is that a good idea on really old CPUs?

I want to update my old box to Slackware 12.1. Currently on that box is Slackware 12.0 with a recompiled 2.6.21.5 non-SMP kernel.

I don't want to (and can't) use my kernel configuration file for my new box. That box is a dual core AM2 BE-2400 (K8) with 4 GB of RAM. I also have more hardware on the new box that is not available on the old box. I don't even run udev on the old box because the hardware is static and I don't use USB there.

My old box runs a 400 MHz K6-III+ with 256 MB of RAM. So even if the recommendation remains to use the SMP kernel, I need to modify the configuration down to that level.

Typically I would update the config file by running make oldconfig. I'm still inclined to continue that habit unless somebody explains in a compelling manner why I should switch to the SMP kernel for this old box.

Thanks.
 
Old 06-29-2008, 05:51 AM   #2
salasi
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2007
Location: Directly above centre of the earth, UK
Distribution: SuSE, plus some hopping
Posts: 3,919

Rep: Reputation: 779Reputation: 779Reputation: 779Reputation: 779Reputation: 779Reputation: 779Reputation: 779
If you want to use a recent kernel, its hard to do anything else.

The argument from the kernel developers is that, these days, the performance hit of using an smp capable kernel on a non-smp cpu is so low, why should they support anything else? So, where you once had to get a kernel with 'smp' in the name to get smp support, nowadays the default kernel is smp (but doesn't have smp in the name) unless someone downstream has hacked it to take out the smp capabilities.

I've been trying to investigate when exactly this happened, and the closest I can come up with is this comment:

http://kerneltrap.org/node/13911

that it was already 'recent history' by July 21, 2007.
 
Old 06-29-2008, 02:05 PM   #3
Woodsman
Senior Member
 
Registered: Oct 2005
Distribution: Slackware 14.1
Posts: 3,482

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534Reputation: 534
Hmm. Perhaps then I have been using an SMP kernel on my old box and never noticed the difference. With that presumption I'm going to proceed with make oldconfig.
 
Old 06-29-2008, 05:42 PM   #4
the3dfxdude
Member
 
Registered: May 2007
Posts: 332

Rep: Reputation: 100Reputation: 100
It seems like it would make the kernel larger to build with SMP.
 
Old 06-29-2008, 06:04 PM   #5
hitest
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2004
Location: Prince Rupert, B.C., Canada
Distribution: Slackware, OpenBSD
Posts: 4,280

Rep: Reputation: 588Reputation: 588Reputation: 588Reputation: 588Reputation: 588Reputation: 588
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodsman View Post
My old box runs a 400 MHz K6-III+ with 256 MB of RAM. So even if the recommendation remains to use the SMP kernel, I need to modify the configuration down to that level.
I'm running the stock smp kernel on Slackware 12.1 on my Plll 667 IBM with 256 MB RAM, it runs just fine. I think you should be fine on your K-6.
 
Old 06-29-2008, 06:12 PM   #6
T3slider
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2007
Distribution: Slackware64-14.1
Posts: 2,298

Rep: Reputation: 722Reputation: 722Reputation: 722Reputation: 722Reputation: 722Reputation: 722Reputation: 722
Quote:
Originally Posted by salasi
So, where you once had to get a kernel with 'smp' in the name to get smp support, nowadays the default kernel is smp (but doesn't have smp in the name) unless someone downstream has hacked it to take out the smp capabilities.
Um...I don't think any hacking is needed, unless the kernel is really really screwy. There is a CONFIG_SMP option -- the help states this:
Code:
  │ CONFIG_SMP:                                                             │
  │                                                                         │
  │ This enables support for systems with more than one CPU. If you have    │
  │ a system with only one CPU, like most personal computers, say N. If     │
  │ you have a system with more than one CPU, say Y.                        │
  │                                                                         │
  │ If you say N here, the kernel will run on single and multiprocessor     │
  │ machines, but will use only one CPU of a multiprocessor machine. If     │
  │ you say Y here, the kernel will run on many, but not all,               │
  │ singleprocessor machines. On a singleprocessor machine, the kernel      │
  │ will run faster if you say N here.                                      │
  │                                                                         │
  │ Note that if you say Y here and choose architecture "586" or            │
  │ "Pentium" under "Processor family", the kernel will not work on 486     │
  │ architectures. Similarly, multiprocessor kernels for the "PPro"         │
  │ architecture may not work on all Pentium based boards.                  │
  │                                                                         │
  │ People using multiprocessor machines who say Y here should also say     │
  │ Y to "Enhanced Real Time Clock Support", below. The "Advanced Power     │
  │ Management" code will be disabled if you say Y here.                    │
  │                                                                         │
  │ See also the <file:Documentation/smp.txt>,                              │
  │ <file:Documentation/i386/IO-APIC.txt>,                                  │
  │ <file:Documentation/nmi_watchdog.txt> and the SMP-HOWTO available at    │
  │ <http://www.tldp.org/docs.html#howto>.                                  │
  │                                                                         │
  │ If you don't know what to do here, say N.                               │
  │                                                                         │
  │ Symbol: SMP [=y]                                                        │
  │ Prompt: Symmetric multi-processing support                              │
  │   Defined at arch/x86/Kconfig:174                                       │
  │   Location:                                                             │
  │     -> Processor type and features                                      │
  │   Selected by: X86_VOYAGER && <choice> && X86_32 && !BROKEN || X86_NUMA │
The CONFIG_SMP option is not set in the generic or huge non-smp kernels.

Last edited by T3slider; 06-29-2008 at 06:14 PM.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Does Debian 'Testing' Installer autodetect dual CPUs and install SMP kernel? Akhran Debian 2 10-11-2006 10:54 AM
Maximum Number of cpus with SMP demosp Linux - General 2 10-02-2006 06:33 PM
Hyperthread server goes to kernel panic with SMP kernic, boots ok with non SMP kernel abefroman Linux - Kernel 1 09-15-2006 06:43 PM
Any reason to keep a non-smp kernel installed on a smp FC3 machine? jim-j Fedora 2 03-12-2006 08:06 AM
SMP & 64 bit CPUs linuxhippy Fedora 6 09-11-2005 08:33 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:30 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration