Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 3 Oct 2001 13:27:42 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 3 Oct 2001 13:27:33 -0400 Received: from chiara.elte.hu ([157.181.150.200]:60936 "HELO chiara.elte.hu") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Wed, 3 Oct 2001 13:27:13 -0400 Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2001 19:25:18 +0200 (CEST) From: Ingo Molnar Reply-To: To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Ben Greear , jamal , , Alexey Kuznetsov , Robert Olsson , Benjamin LaHaise , , Alan Cox Subject: Re: [announce] [patch] limiting IRQ load, irq-rewrite-2.4.11-B5 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 3 Oct 2001, Linus Torvalds wrote: > [...] I would not be surprised if Ingo finds that trying to put the > machine under heavy disk load with multiple disk controllers might > also cause interrupt mitigation, which would be unacceptably BAD. well, just tested my RAID testsystem as well. I have not tested heavy IO-related IRQ load with the patch before (so it was not tuned for that test in any way), but did so now: an IO test running on 12 disks, (5 IO interfaces: 3 SCSI cards and 2 IDE interfaces) producing 150 MB/sec block IO load and a fair number of SCSI and IDE interrupts, did not trigger the overload code. I started the network overload utility during this test, and the code detected overload on the network interrupt (and only on the network interrupt). IO load is still high (down to 130 MB/sec), while a fair amount of networking load is handled as well. (While there certainly are higher IO loads on some Linux boxes, mine should be above the average IO traffic.) Ingo - 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/