Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 4 Oct 2001 13:41:24 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 4 Oct 2001 13:41:15 -0400 Received: from h24-64-71-161.cg.shawcable.net ([24.64.71.161]:8433 "EHLO webber.adilger.int") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 4 Oct 2001 13:41:10 -0400 From: Andreas Dilger Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2001 11:40:21 -0600 To: jamal Cc: Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Alexey Kuznetsov , Robert Olsson , Benjamin LaHaise , netdev@oss.sgi.com, Simon Kirby Subject: Re: [announce] [patch] limiting IRQ load, irq-rewrite-2.4.11-B5 Message-ID: <20011004114021.F31061@turbolinux.com> Mail-Followup-To: jamal , Ingo Molnar , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Alexey Kuznetsov , Robert Olsson , Benjamin LaHaise , netdev@oss.sgi.com, Simon Kirby In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.22i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Oct 04, 2001 07:34 -0400, jamal wrote: > 1) you shut down shared interupts; take a look at this posting by Marcus > Sundberg > > --------------- > > 0: 7602983 XT-PIC timer > 1: 10575 XT-PIC keyboard > 2: 0 XT-PIC cascade > 8: 1 XT-PIC rtc > 11: 1626004 XT-PIC Toshiba America Info Systems ToPIC95 PCI > \ > to Cardbus Bridge with ZV Support, Toshiba America Info Systems ToPIC95 > PCI \ > to Cardbus Bridge with ZV Support (#2), usb-uhci, eth0, BreezeCom Card, \ > Intel 440MX, irda0 12: 1342 XT-PIC PS/2 Mouse > 14: 23605 XT-PIC ide0 > > ----------------------------- > > Now you go and shut down IRQ 11 and punish all devices there. If you can > avoid that, it is acceptable as a temporary replacement to be upgraded to > a better scheme. Well, if we fall back to polling devices if the IRQ is disabled, then the shared interrupt case can be handled as well. However, there were complaints about the patch when Ingo had device polling included, as opposed to just IRQ mitigation. > 2) By not being granular enough and shutting down sources of noise, you > are actually not being effective in increasing system utilization. Well, since the IRQ itself uses system resources, if it is disabled it will allow those resources to actually do something (i.e. polling instead, when we know there is a lot of work to do). Even if it does not have polling in the patch, the choice is to turn off the IRQ, or have the system hang because it can not make any progress because of the high number of interrupts. If your patch ensures that the network IRQ load is kept down, then Ingo's will never be activated. Cheers, Andreas -- Andreas Dilger \ "If a man ate a pound of pasta and a pound of antipasto, \ would they cancel out, leaving him still hungry?" http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/ -- Dogbert - 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/