Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263298AbTE0LkC (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 May 2003 07:40:02 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263302AbTE0LkB (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 May 2003 07:40:01 -0400 Received: from ppp-217-133-42-200.cust-adsl.tiscali.it ([217.133.42.200]:65502 "EHLO dualathlon.random") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263298AbTE0LkA (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 May 2003 07:40:00 -0400 Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 13:53:14 +0200 From: Andrea Arcangeli To: "David S. Miller" Cc: akpm@digeo.com, davidsen@tmr.com, haveblue@us.ibm.com, habanero@us.ibm.com, mbligh@aracnet.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: userspace irq balancer Message-ID: <20030527115314.GU3767@dualathlon.random> References: <20030527010903.GF3767@dualathlon.random> <20030526.181309.02272953.davem@redhat.com> <20030527012617.GH3767@dualathlon.random> <20030526.231120.26504389.davem@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030526.231120.26504389.davem@redhat.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-GPG-Key: 1024D/68B9CB43 X-PGP-Key: 1024R/CB4660B9 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1646 Lines: 37 On Mon, May 26, 2003 at 11:11:20PM -0700, David S. Miller wrote: > From: Andrea Arcangeli > Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 03:26:17 +0200 > > I argue with that, NAPI needs to poll somehow, either you hook into the > kernel slowing down every single schedule, or you need to offload this > work to a kernel thread. > > You've never shown what this "offloading work to a kernel thread" > actually accomplishes. in case it wasn't obvious (that is the whole point of ksoftirqd) what accomplishes in a single word is "fairness" and "not starving userspace during networking". > What I've seen it do is decrease the amount of total softirq work that > cpu can get done. And avoiding ksoftirqd actually running makes > performance get better. sure, as far as you don't care about anything but the network load. I mean, if you can't care less of the userspae progress and you don't want the usual scheduler fariness guarantees, then you can hack the kernel and replace the ksoftirqd with an infinite loop and networking will certainly perform better since it will be able to stall indefinitely all userspace computations in favour of pure irq driven networking I/O running all in irq context and never ending. I really thought this was obvious to everybody, otherwise there would be no point for ksoftirqd at all if you can't care less to hang userspace indefinitely. Andrea - 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/