Re: arch/i386/Kconfig: CONFIG_IRQBALANCE Description

From: Jamie Lokier
Date: Thu Mar 25 2004 - 14:10:10 EST

Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
> Is that real SMP, or hyperthreading? If it's hyperthreading, then
> it makes sense that the IRQs are not balanced.

That's unfair to the two tasks which might be running on each virtual
CPU: one of the tasks is interrupted often.

> In fact I have a server on which the IRQ balancing code does
> balance over the 2 virtual CPUs by accident (still have to debug
> what goes wrong and file a proper bug report) and as a result
> performance sucked until I turned it off.

What caused the suckage? Obviously there's a small time spend doing
the work of rebalancing, but there is no cache hit from moving an
interrupt between virtual CPUs, unlike with SMP, so why did that make
performance suck?

-- Jamie
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at