[lkml]   [2003]   [Mar]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: is irq smp affinity good for anything?
On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 07:40:15AM -0500, Richard B. Johnson wrote:

Hi Richard, thanks so much for your reply

> On Tue, 11 Mar 2003 wrote:
> 33 MHz machines easily handle 6,000 interrupts per second --
> unless you are trying to execute code within that interrupt
> that requires 1/6000th of a second to execute! Perhaps it's
> not a "latency" problem, but an interrupt code-bloat problem
> where most of the stuff should be executed out of the interrupt
> context.

it seems I explained too fuzzy/I had to explain it better

what I wanted to try is avoidoiding irq latency paths in the CPU where is
executing the ISR, where I'm interested not delaying time stamps by any other

And yes... maybe I'm a little paranoid about this, but doing an
echo <something> > /proc/irqs/[0-9]*/smp_affinity is cheap
and it's supossed? I should get better results... or not?


I did not expect to increase global latency to these results...
and neither to increase latency in the CPU that's receiving
just one interrupt!


PD: I'm not doing a driver, just measuring

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

---> Visita 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
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:33    [W:0.040 / U:7.152 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site