Re: disklabel MAXPARTITIONS reversal

[Paul Koning <paulkoning%comcast.net@localhost>]

On Apr 9, 2013, at 12:37 PM, Johnny Billquist wrote:

> On 2013-04-09 18:34, Martin Husemann wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 09, 2013 at 09:02:31AM -0700, Mark Pizzolato - Info Comm wrote:
>> 
>>> I'm not 100% sure what you want here.
>> 
>> Heh - my notebook runs warm whenever simh sits idle at the (guest OS)
>> console prompt. I want it to run cooler.
>> 
>>> When a simulated clock tick happens, other
>>> potential sources of external events are polled to determine if data
>>> has arrived.  These include console and/or other simulated multiplexer
>>> and network input.  So, the console and any other configured
>>> multiplexer devices will be polled 100 times a second.
>> 
>> It might just happen to not work well with NetBSD cpu stats sampling, or
>> there might be a bug - I haven't investigated more closely. top shows
>> one cpu 100% busy, but that may be a missampling.
>> 
>> Anyway, I just wondered why it did not use blocking io and threads, and you
>> answered that - looking forward to newer versions.
> 
> Did you tell simh to idle based on NetBSD idle pattern?

SIMH VAX?  That doesn't work for current NetBSD -- the "NetBSD" idle setting is 
for an older release, assuming it ever worked which I don't know.  I've looked 
at it to see how to fix that -- it would be rather hard.  Probably the best way 
is to change the kernel to tell simh explicitly, somewhat like is done on the 
Xen hosted version.  Given the way the NetBSD scheduler is coded in V6, there 
is no reasonable way for simh to detect "idle".

        paul