Re: irq load balancing

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Venkat Subbiah <venkats@...>
Cc: Chris Snook <csnook@...>, <linux-kernel@...>
Date: Thursday, September 13, 2007 - 4:44 pm

On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 01:31:39PM -0700, Venkat Subbiah wrote:

Since most network devices have a single status register for both
receiver and transmit (and errors and the like), which needs a lock to
protect access, you will likely end up with serious thrashing of moving
the lock between cpus.

--
Len Sorensen
-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
irq load balancing , Venkat Subbiah, (Tue Sep 11, 7:18 pm)
Re: irq load balancing, Chris Snook, (Wed Sep 12, 5:44 pm)
RE: irq load balancing, Venkat Subbiah, (Thu Sep 13, 4:31 pm)
Re: irq load balancing, Lennart Sorensen, (Thu Sep 13, 4:44 pm)
RE: irq load balancing, Venkat Subbiah, (Thu Sep 13, 5:02 pm)
Re: irq load balancing, Chris Snook, (Thu Sep 13, 5:30 pm)
Re: irq load balancing, Arjan van de Ven, (Wed Sep 12, 10:47 am)
Re: irq load balancing, kalash nainwal, (Wed Sep 12, 7:55 am)
Re: irq load balancing, Stephen Hemminger, (Wed Sep 12, 7:51 am)