On Tue, 20 Nov 2007 15:17:15 +1100
Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
because the in-kernel one is actually quite bad.
please run the userspace irq balancer, see http://www.irqbalance.org
afaik most distros ship that by default anyway.
that depends on your chipset; some chipsets do worse than that.
actually.... no. IRQ balancing is not a "fast" decision; every time you
move an interrupt around, you end up causing a really a TON of cache
line bounces, and generally really bad performance (esp if you do it
for networking ones, since you destroy the packet reassembly stuff in
the tcp/ip stack).
Instead, what ends up working is if you do high level categories of
interrupt classes and balance within those (so that no 2 networking
irqs are on the same core/package unless you have more nics than cores)
etc. Balancing on a 10 second scale seems to work quite well; no need
to pull that complexity into the kernel....
--
If you want to reach me at my work email, use arjan@linux.intel.com
For development, discussion and tips for power savings,
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
-