Re: userspace irq balancer

From: James Cleverdon (jamesclv@us.ibm.com)
Date: Thu May 22 2003 - 09:18:06 EST


On Wednesday 21 May 2003 07:04 pm, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
[ Snip! ]
> ...
> IMHO Linux on Pentium IV should use the TPR in conjunction with _very_
> simplistic interrupt load accounting by default and all more
> sophisticated logic should be punted straight to userspace as an
> administrative API.
>
[ Snip! ]
>
> i.e. frob the fscking TPR as recommended by the APIC docs every once in
> a while by default, punt anything (and everything) fancier up to
> userspace, and get the code that doesn't even understand what the fsck
> DESTMOD means the Hell out of the kernel and the Hell away from my
> IO-APIC RTE's.
>
>
> -- wli

Here's my old very stupid TPR patch . It lacks TPRing soft ints for kernel
preemption, etc. Because the xTPR logic only compares the top nibble of the
TPR and I don't want to mask out IRQs unnecessarily, it only tracks busy/idle
and IRQ/no-IRQ.

Simple enough for you, Bill? 8^)

-- 
James Cleverdon
IBM xSeries Linux Solutions
{jamesclv(Unix, preferred), cleverdj(Notes)} at us dot ibm dot 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/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri May 23 2003 - 22:00:49 EST