Date: Tue, 20 May 2003 07:01:27 -0700
From: "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com>
To: "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com>
cc: haveblue@us.ibm.com, wli@holomorphy.com, arjanv@redhat.com,
       pbadari@us.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, gh@us.ibm.com,
       johnstul@us.ibm.com, jamesclv@us.ibm.com, akpm@digeo.com,
       mannthey@us.ibm.com
Subject: Re: userspace irq balancer
Message-ID: <90250000.1053439285@[10.10.2.4]>
In-Reply-To: <20030519.231319.91314647.davem@redhat.com>
References: <20030520034622.GK8978@holomorphy.com><1053407030.13207.253.camel@nighthawk><88560000.1053409990@[10.10.2.4]> <20030519.231319.91314647.davem@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1057
Lines: 27

> How does the in-kernel IRQ load balancing measure "load" and
> "busyness"?  Herein lies the most absolutely fundamental problem with
> this code, it fails to recognize that we end up with most of our
> networking "load" from softint context.

OK, that's a great observation, and probably fixable. What were the 
author's comments when you told him that?
 
> rm -rf in-kernel-irqbalance;

It's *very* late in the day to be ripping out such chunks of code.
1. Prove new code works better for you => make it a config option.
2. Prove new code works better for everyone => rip it out.

I think we're at 1, not 2.

Note that the userspace stuff doesn't even require that the kernel
stuff be disabled ... it should just override it (I can believe
there maybe is a bug that needs fixing, but it works by design).

M.

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