![]() | ||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
lør, 06.12.2003 kl. 06.09 skrev William Lee Irwin III: > l?r, 06.12.2003 kl. 05.54 skrev William Lee Irwin III: > >> Okay, irqbalance has gaffed (as predicted). Could you send in > >> /proc/cpuinfo and /var/log/dmesg? > > On Sat, Dec 06, 2003 at 05:57:14AM +0100, Stian Jordet wrote: > > Here they are. Thanks for looking into this :) > > This tells me you're not being mistaken for HT. > > It also suggests it's the policy not doing what you want it to. If your > interrupt rate isn't high (according to what metric I have no idea; > presumably it should depend on the expense of handling it, which is > driver-dependent but about which the code has no knowledge), it won't > rebalance the irq's. > > If you actually manage to get interrupt rates exceeding its thresholds, > you should see interrupts migrated, but only dynamically and on-demand, > not under light usage. I really don't know the definition of "light usage", but I'm beating the aic7xxx and eth0 quite hard at times, without any interrupts being migrated. Anyway, thanks :) This haven't been a problem for me so far, and I doubt it ever will :) Stian - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | |||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 12:59 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | ||||||||||