On Mon, 2006-10-09 at 10:28 -0500, Protasevich, Natalie wrote:
> I'd like also to question current policies of user space irqbalanced. It
> seems to just go round-robin without much heuristics involved.
only for the timer interrupt and only because "people" didn't want to
see it bound to a specific CPU. For all others there's quite some
heuristics actually
> We are
> seeing loss of timer interrupts on our systems - and the more processors
> the more noticeable it is, but it starts even on 8x partitions; on 48x
> system I see about 50% loss, on both ia32 and x86_64 (haven't checked on
> ia64 yet). With say 16 threads it is unsettling to see 70% overall idle
> time, and still only 40-50% of interrupts go through. System's time is
> not affected, so the problem is on the back burner for now :) It's not
> clear yet whether this is software or hardware fault,
I'd call it a hardware fault. But them I'm biased.
-
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]
