Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 3 Oct 2001 12:23:21 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 3 Oct 2001 12:23:02 -0400 Received: from colorfullife.com ([216.156.138.34]:37380 "EHLO colorfullife.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 3 Oct 2001 12:22:57 -0400 Message-ID: <001e01c14c27$bc542070$010411ac@local> From: "Manfred Spraul" To: "Ingo Molnar" Cc: , "jamal" Subject: Re: [patch] auto-limiting IRQ load take #2, irq-rewrite-2.4.11-F4 Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 18:23:20 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4522.1200 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 3 Oct 2001, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > the attached patch contains a cleaned up version of IRQ > auto-mitigation. > What's the purpose of the patch? Should it enable itself under load, or is it an emergency switch if a broken driver (or broken hardware) causes an IRQ storm that makes the computer unusable? As an emergency switch it's a good idea. But it should never enable itself unless the box is nearly dead, and it can't replace NAPI and interrupt mitigation. > (i'd like to stress the point again that the goal of this approach > is *not* to be nice. This is an airbag mechanizm, it can and > will hurt performance. But my box does not lock up > anymore.) > Ok, then I like the patch. -- Manfred - 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/