Re: [PATCH v6] x86/apic: limit irq affinity

[Arjan van de Ven]

On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 09:41:18 -0800
ebiederm@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Eric W. Biederman) wrote:
> Oii.
> 
> I don't think it is bad to export information to applications like
> irqbalance.
> 
> I think it pretty horrible that one of the standard ways I have heard
> to improve performance on 10G nics is to kill irqbalance.

irqbalance does not move networking irqs; if it does there's something
evil going on in the system. But thanks for the bugreport ;)


> Guys.  Migrating an irq from one cpu to another while the device is
> running without dropping interrupts is hard.

no it isn't; we've been doing it for years.


> I think the irq scheduler is the only scheduler (except for batch
> jobs) that we don't put in the kernel.  It seems to me that if we are
> going to go to all of the trouble to rewrite the generic code to
> better support irqbalance because we are having serious irqbalance
> problems, it will be less effort to suck irqbalance into the kernel
> along with everything else.

we had that; it didn't work.
what I'm asking for is for the kernel to expose the numa information;
right now that is the piece that is missing.

-- 
Arjan van de Ven 	Intel Open Source Technology Centre
For development, discussion and tips for power savings, 
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
--
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/