On Thu, 2006-07-06 at 01:18 -0600, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
Hi,
> Andrew Morton <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > On Wed, 5 Jul 2006 22:59:05 -0700
> > Andrew Morton <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, 05 Jul 2006 23:42:00 -0600
> >> [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman) wrote:
> >>
> >> > So I suspect that we need to de-percpuify kernel_stat.irqs.
> >>
> >> I think so.
> >
> > Maybe not. If we do this, we lose the pretty CPUn columns in
> > /proc/interrupts. That /proc/interrupts display requires that we maintain
> > NR_CPUS*NR_IRQS counters.
>
> Yes. Although at least part of that display is per architecture
> so we may be able to get away with a little more.
irqbalance uses the per column data for it's work.. please don't kill
the information or format.
Also if you have 1 number per irq, you keep bouncing that cacheline
around *all the time* if your irq policy is set to rotating (as many
chipsets do by default unless the OS overrides it)
Greetings,
Arjan van de Ven
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
