> From: Andreas Kostyrka <andreas@ag.or.at>
> To: Sachin Garg <sachin@cdacb.ernet.in>
> cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List at VGER <linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu>
> Subject: Re: OFFTOPIC: Regarding NT vs Linux
>
> Win/NT SMP sucks. C't (a german magazine tested SMP boxes) found, that
> it doesn't scale very much, because it seems that interrupts are done
> only on one processor. Linux 2.0/SMP sucks probably even more :(, as it
> has a global spin lock :(((((
>
> I was under the impression (from reading on the smp list) that NT 4.0 spread
> the interrupts over the CPU's?
C't has been doing a review about SMP boxes, and it more or less found
that NT seems to be one CPU centric: One CPU was going into overload,
while the sysmon reported the other CPUs more or less idle :O
(This suggests that the I/O stuff is handled by one CPU, as this was a
Webserving benchmark.)
>
> I was meaning to ask... Does Linux do this for all architectures? (I quick
> look to me and it looks like interrupts on the x86 are handled by only one
> processor?)
That's actually what I've thought, but perhaps they are working on it in
2.1.x?
Andreas