Re: 2.6.1 and irq balancing

[Arjan van de Ven]

On Sun, 2004-01-11 at 04:38, Nick Piggin wrote:
> Ed Tomlinson wrote:
> 
> >Hi,
> >
> >What is the load on the box when this is happening?  If its low think
> >this is optimal (for cache reasons).
> >  
> >
> 
> I'd rather see different interrupt sources run on different CPUs
> initially, which would help fairness a little bit, and should be
> more optimal with big interrupt loads.
> 
> 
> 0:      xxx1     0      0      0
> 1:      0     xxx2      0      0
> 2:      0        0   xxx3      0
> 3:      0        0      0   xxx4
> 
> This would delay the need for interrupt balancing in the case where
> 2 or more interrupts are heavily used.

this is what irqbalanced will do (but more inteligent than just using
the irq number as round robin seed).

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part