Re: [PATCH 0/2]: Remote softirq invocation infrastructure.

[Daniel Walker]

On Sat, 2008-09-20 at 08:45 -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Sep 2008 08:29:21 -0700
> > 
> > > Jen's, as stated, has block layer uses for this.  I intend to use
> > > this for receive side flow seperation on non-multiqueue network
> > > cards.  And Steffen Klassert has a set of IPSEC parallelization
> > > changes that can very likely make use of this.
> > 
> > What's the benefit that you (or Jens) sees from migrating softirqs
> > from specific cpu's to others?
> 
> it means you do all the processing on the CPU that submitted the IO in
> the first place, and likely still has the various metadata pieces in
> its CPU cache (or at least you know you won't need to bounce them over)


In the case of networking and block I would think a lot of the softirq
activity is asserted from userspace.. Maybe the scheduler shouldn't be
migrating these tasks, or could take this softirq activity into
account ..

Daniel

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/