Re: userspace irq balancer

[William Lee Irwin III (wli@holomorphy.com)]

William Lee Irwin III <wli@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> In
>>  the userspace implementation the reprogramming is done infrequently
>>  enough to make even significant cost negligible; in-kernel the cost
>>  is entirely uncontrolled and the rate of reprogramming unlimited.

On Mon, May 26, 2003 at 06:59:20PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> eh?
> #define MAX_BALANCED_IRQ_INTERVAL       (5*HZ)
> #define MIN_BALANCED_IRQ_INTERVAL       (HZ/2)

The number of interrupt sources on a system ends up scaling this up to
numerous IO-APIC RTE reprograms and ioapic_lock acquisitions per-second
(granted, with a 5s timeout between reprogramming storms) where it
competes against IO-APIC interrupt acknowledgements.

Making the lock per- IO-APIC would at least put a bound on the number
of competitors mutually interfering with each other, but a tighter
bound on the amount of work than NR_IRQS would be more useful than that.


-- wli
-
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/