From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2004 11:02:15 -0500 From: jmk@plan9.bell-labs.com To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: RE: [9fans] archmp In-Reply-To: <7DD37218104E31429E79EB0BB136800E11C4E6@vargas.ntdom.cupdx> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Topicbox-Message-UUID: 0bc3b9a0-eace-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 On Wed Nov 24 00:54:28 EST 2004, BHuntsman@mail2.cu-portland.edu wrote: > Yes yes... now that's what I was looking for. I was hunting for where I > might be able to control (or at least know) on which cpu a program executes > (or which parts on which cpus), and the memory issues that would result. > It's all built-in, you say? What happens if a cpu fails (or is removed)? > (not that happens very often, (or ever, so far as I've seen) but it's a > consideration...) Thanks!! > There is currently no capabilility to remove a cpu from the set found at startup on the x86 in Plan 9. It could be done, though. If a cpu fails you are in deep trouble in so many ways it's not worth thinking about. That's not to say we couldn't do a better job and add hot-swap for systems that can do it.