From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Mon, 14 Jul 2008 13:39:48 -0700 From: "Roman V. Shaposhnik" In-reply-to: To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> Message-id: <1216067988.14715.52.camel@goose.sun.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 References: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: Re: [9fans] Plan 9 and multicores/parallelism/concurrency? Topicbox-Message-UUID: e6b2044a-ead3-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 On Mon, 2008-07-14 at 16:08 -0400, a@9srv.net wrote: > // But do you know of any part [of Plan 9] that would be > // beneficial for highly-SMP systems? >=20 > Beneficial compared to what, I guess. Lets say a typical Linux kernel.=20 > The kernel's biggest contribution here is keeping processes inexpensive > compared to unix. Not just inexpensive, but also better aligned with how they use compute resources (virtual vs. physical threads) and memory resources. > // It'll be interesting to see how a single Plan9 kernel scales on > // something like a Batoka box (256 hardware threads per box, > // 64 physical cores). >=20 > Send me one and I'll see if I can find out. =E2=98=BA Speaking of which -- is SPARC port of Plan9 still alive? Thanks, Roman.