Re: [PATCH 1/3] Separate IRQ-stacks from 4K-stacks option
From: Timothy Miller
Date: Wed Oct 20 2004 - 13:25:58 EST
Ingo Molnar wrote:
it is not intended for servers, due to the overhead of redirection. It's
for realtime workloads and for latency-sensitive audio desktop
workloads. For servers and normal desktops the current IRQ and softirq
model is pretty OK.
I commented previously about the preemption allowing the kernel to keep
more resources busy. So if you have 6 disk controllers and 4 NICs, the
preemption can allow the kernel to keep more of them busier at the same
time, while without preemption, one resource might get starved while
non-preemptable code is servicing another.
This makes the overhead very much worth it.
Are there test results which demonstrate that this theory doesn't apply
practically to real-world server loads?
I would expect a very busy server to be helped by this in a noticable
way, but then I am often short-sighted. :)
-
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/