Re: [PATCH] irq_balance does not make sense with HT but single physicalCPU

[Kai Bankett]

Zwane Mwaikambo wrote:

> On Wed, 26 Nov 2003, Kai Bankett wrote:
>
> > this patch should disable irq_balance threat in case of only one
> > installed physical cpu thats running in HyperThreading-mode (so reported
> > as 2 cpus).
> > I think it should make no sense to run irq_blanance in that special case
> > - please correct me if i´m wrong.
>
>
> +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_HT
> +   /* On Hyper-Threading CPUs - if only one physical installed
> +      balance does not make sense */
> +   if (cpu_has_ht && smp_num_siblings == 2 && num_online_cpus() == 2) {
> +       irqbalance_disabled = 1;
> +       return 0;
> +   }
> +#endif
>
> Further down, i believe the following would have the same effect;
>
>    /*
>     * Enable physical balance only if more than 1 physical processor
>     * is present
>     */
>    if (smp_num_siblings > 1 && !cpus_empty(tmp))
>        physical_balance = 1;
>
>
> tmp = cpu_online_map >> 2;
>
> so we drop the first two processors (logical or physical) and only enable
> physical balance if there are still processors present in the map. Or are
> you observing something else?

Ok - inserted an printk(smp_num_siblings) to have a look into 
smp_num_siblings at that point.

It says : smp_num_siblings = 2

But anyways if physical_balance is set to 1 that won´t prevent anything 
from running through/sleeping in the kernel_thread-loop.
The kernel_thread(balance_irq ...) later on will be started/will run not 
matter what physical_balance says.

Do there exist any cases where smp_siblings are created without 
HyperThreading ? (As far as I remember it´s only incremented/used on 
i386 hyperthreaded architectures - but not 100% sure)

-> At least the if has to look like :

...
if (smp_num_siblings > 2 && !cpus_empty(tm))
    physical_balance = 1;
...

(if - like in my case - smp_num_siblings == 2 on a single P4 system)

That one still does not solve the case in which the kernel_thread is not 
needed and only eats resources.
Of course - maybe the whole thing can be merged together. Not sure about 
that. But source will become more complex in that case - k.i.s.s. may be 
the better approach.

Thanks,

Kai

--
--------------------------------------------
Kai Bankett
Network Engineering

AOL Deutschland GmbH & Co. KG

Millerntorplatz 1
20359 Hamburg
Tel.:  +49 40 36159 - 7559
Fax.:  +49 40 36159 - 7510
Mobil: +49 172 2353870
eMail to  kbankett@xxxxxxx
AIM:      kbankett
--------------------------------------------

-
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/