Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 26 May 2003 18:13:09 -0700 (PDT) | Subject | Re: userspace irq balancer | From | "David S. Miller" <> |
| |
From: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de> Date: Tue, 27 May 2003 03:09:03 +0200
I'm not going to implement the above in 2.4, that sounds a 2.5 thing,
Then your 2.4.x load balancing is buggy for networking. You simply cannot ignore this issue and act as if it does not exist and does not have huge consequence for IRQ load balancing decisions.
but my point is that by just ignoring ksoftirqd in the idle selection should avoid the biggest of the NAPI issues.
On a properly functioning system, ksoftirqd should not be running.
> But deciding how to intepret these measurements and what to do in > response is a userlevel policy decision. This also coincides with > how cpufreq works. you mean you can have slightly different modes selectable by sysctl right?
One posibility. Another is a descriptor describing things like how much to weight hardware vs. software IRQ load, vs. process load etc.
or do you really want to generate a reschedule per second
No, nothing like this. - 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/
| |