[lkml]   [2001]   [May]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [patch] softirq-2.4.5-A1
    On Sun, May 27, 2001 at 09:08:51PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
    > i took at look at your ksoftirq stuff yesterday, and i think it's
    > completely unnecessery and adds serious overhead to softirq handling. The
    > whole point of softirqs is to have maximum scalability and no
    > serialization. Why did you add ksoftirqd, would you mind explaining it?

    The only case ksoftirqd runs is when the stock kernel does the wrong
    thing and potentially delays the softirq of 1/HZ. Nothing else.

    When current kernel does the right thing ksoftirq cannot generate any
    scalability problem and furthmore ksoftirqd is a per-cpu thing so if you
    face a scalability problem with it that simply means you need to fix the
    scheduler because then it means you would face a scalability issue as
    well every time a tux thread calls schedule().

    90% of the time ksoftirqd will never run, when it runs it means you want
    to pay for a scheduler run to get it running. The price of the scheduler
    is just the price for the logic that balance the softirq load in a fair
    manner and without buggy latencies.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 12:54    [W:0.022 / U:92.084 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site