lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2003]   [Mar]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
Subjectis irq smp affinity good for anything?
From


if IRQ affinity cannot help in interrupt latency and
interrupt auto/balancing get's the same throughtput
as irq binding... what is irq smp affinity for???

from this mail from intel
http://www.uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0301.0/1886.html
I understand that intel's interrupt auto/balancing works equal that manually
tunning the interrupts....

so?

Ulisses



On Mon, Mar 10, 2003 at 11:22:22PM +0100, uaca@alumni.uv.es wrote:
>
> Hi all
>
> I have measured interrupt latency of a bi-processor system with akpm's intlat/timepeg
> utilities and kernel 2.4.20. The system uses is a two-way PIII@800Mhz
> -- Intel motherboard, ISP 2100 if I remember ok, with a SCSI disk on a aic-7896
>
> I tried to know if I could reduce the latency of an interrupt handler by
> binding this handler to a particular cpu and not allowing any other
> interrupt to execute in that cpu.
>
> I found that overall latency increases, but also the latency on both cpus,
> that is, I could not reduce the latency on the interrupt I was interested
>
> I also tried to disallowing just scsi & ethernet handlers to execute on the
> cpu in wich I'm binding the interrupt handler I'm insterested with, I get
> similar results
>
> the interrupt handler I'm interested with is an ATM card receiving
> around 6000 interrupts/second
>
> any comment will be greatly appreciated
>
> Thanks in advance
>
>
> I attach a sample table
>
> Ulisses
>
> Debian GNU/Linux: a dream come true
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> "Computers are useless. They can only give answers." Pablo Picasso
>
> ---> Visita http://www.valux.org/ para saber acerca de la <---
> ---> Asociación Valenciana de Usuarios de Linux <---
>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
> bound-* -> binding irq's to specific cpu's
> not_bound-* -> default irq balancing
> idle-* -> no extra load, just receiving interrupts, and using irq balancing
> (not tcpdumping from the device)
>
> *-round? -> same test, just another sample
>
> The following loads were added:
>
> */cpu_io_load* -> adding a process load, and another process doing intensive I/O (write) +tcpdump
> */cpu_load* -> process load +tcpdump
> */io_load* -> I/O load +tcpdump
> */no_load* -> just tcpdump (always running on the ATM card)
>
> time unit is microseconds
>
> <config name> <cpu0> <cpu1> <both cpu> <running time>
> bound-round1/cpu_io_load.conf-capturando-atm 72721403.12 32011026.4 104732430.03 334000000
> bound-round1/cpu_load.conf-capturando-atm 17330835.03 22209536.73 39540372.14 301000000
> bound-round1/io_load.conf-capturando-atm 26490926.85 35473241.13 61964168.45 332000000
> bound-round1/no_load.conf-capturando-atm 17723058.55 24066995.44 41790054.28 300000000
> bound-round2/cpu_io_load.conf-capturando-atm 70139325.9899999 31673560.18 101812886.64 332000000
> bound-round2/cpu_load.conf-capturando-atm 20834850.44 22103680.54 42938531.31 300000000
> bound-round2/io_load.conf-capturando-atm 25995860.86 35030250.99 61026112.51 331000000
> bound-round2/no_load.conf-capturando-atm 16926317.67 22890716.86 39817034.87 300000000
> not_bound-round1/cpu_io_load.conf-capturando-atm 27857114.18 30214652.36 58071767.23 330000000
> not_bound-round1/cpu_load.conf-capturando-atm 17861389.71 17826837.68 35688227.83 300000000
> not_bound-round1/io_load.conf-capturando-atm 28921009.86 30368027.35 59289037.74 329000000
> not_bound-round1/no_load.conf-capturando-atm 17095881.6 17804144.4 34900026.4 301000000
> not_bound-round2/cpu_io_load.conf-capturando-atm 28958809.19 29576235.94 58535045.78 333000000
> not_bound-round2/cpu_load.conf-capturando-atm 17654701.15 19004883.19 36659584.82 301000000
> not_bound-round2/io_load.conf-capturando-atm 30383447.95 31634551.35 62017999.99 332000000
> not_bound-round2/no_load.conf-capturando-atm 18103003.63 17573932.55 35676936.69 300000000
> idle-round1/no_load.conf-idle 0 0 16030718.21 300000000
> idle-round2/no_load.conf-idle 0 0 16106698.44 300000000
> -
> 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/

--
Debian GNU/Linux: a dream come true
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Computers are useless. They can only give answers." Pablo Picasso

---> Visita http://www.valux.org/ para saber acerca de la <---
---> Asociación Valenciana de Usuarios de Linux <---

-
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 13:33    [W:0.093 / U:2.440 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site