Re: Although CONFIG_IRQBALANCE is enabled IRQ's don't seem to bebalanced very well

[Martin Bligh]

Jesper Juhl wrote:
> On 1/10/06, Martin Bligh <mbligh@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > Josef Sipek wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, Jan 10, 2006 at 12:14:42PM +0100, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > Do I need any userspace tools in addition to CONFIG_IRQBALANCE?
> > >
> > >
> > > Last I checked, yes you do need "irqbalance" (at least that's what
> > > the package is called in debian.
> >
> > Nope - you need the kernel option turned on OR the userspace daemon,
> > not both.
>
> Ok, good to know.
>
>
> > If you're not generating interrupts at a high enough rate, it won't
> > rotate. That's deliberate.
>
>
> Hmm, and what would count as "a high enough rate"?
>
> I just did a small test with thousands of  ping -f's through my NIC
> while at the same time giving the disk a good workout with tons of
> find's, sync's & updatedb's - that sure did drive up the number of
> interrupts and my load average went sky high (amazingly the box was
> still fairly responsive):
>
> root@dragon:/home/juhl# uptime
>  22:59:58 up 12:43,  1 user,  load average: 1015.48, 715.93, 429.07
>
> but, not a single interrupt was handled by CPU1, they all went to CPU0.
>
> Do you have a good way to drive up the nr of interrupts above the
> treshhold for balancing?

Is it HT? ISTR it was intelligent enough to ignore that. But you'd
have to look at the code to be sure.

M.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/