Re: [PATCH] Re: Bad network performance over 2Gbps

From: Chris Snook
Date: Mon Apr 21 2008 - 17:31:49 EST


Bodo Eggert wrote:
On Mon, 21 Apr 2008, Rick Jones wrote:
Bodo Eggert wrote:
On Mon, 21 Apr 2008, Rick Jones wrote:

Be it kernel or user space, for consistent benchmark results it needs to
be
able to be turned-off without turning the code. That leaves me in
agreement
with Stephen that if it must exist, the user space one would be
preferable.
It can be easily terminated with extreme prejudice.

I agree that having a full-featured userspace balancer daemon with lots of
intelligence will be theoretically better, but if you can have a simple
daemon doing OK on many machines for less than the userspace daemon's
kernel stack, why not?
Perhaps my judgement is too colored by benchmark(et)ing, and desires to have
repeatable results on things like neperf, but I very much like to know where
my interrupts are going and don't like them moving around. That is why I am
not particularly fond of either flavor of irq balancing.

That being the case, whatever is out there aught to be able to be disabled on
a running system without having to roll bits or reboot.

Adding a "module" parameter to disable it should be cheap, isn't it?

Except the irq balancing is system-wide. Adding per-device exemptions to an obsolete feature seems like the wrong way to go.

-- Chris
--
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/