Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: userspace irq balancer | From | Dave Hansen <> | Date | 19 May 2003 23:36:23 -0700 |
| |
On Mon, 2003-05-19 at 23:13, David S. Miller wrote: > From: "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com> > Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 22:53:11 -0700 > > I have no frigging idea why you'd want to tear something out that > works well already, and has a shitload of work put into it. > > It's pretty fundamentally broken for having had so much work > put into it. Show me something other than "SpecWEB run for IBM > ran faster" as a reason for keeping this code in there. Can you > even do this?
I don't even think we can do that. That code was being integrated around the same time that our Specweb setup decided to go south on us and start physically frying itself. We never got a chance to run it. BTW, I don't think there are any other kernel developers running Specweb on 2.5 kernels. If there are, please speak up!
Andrew Theurer posted some positive results here, which were quite marginal in the case with 1 nic. 4.7% with two. http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=104212930819212&w=2
-- Dave Hansen haveblue@us.ibm.com
- 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/
| |