Re: binding a network card to a CPU?

Albert D. Cahalan (mark@hoist.nlcomm.com)
Wed, 21 Apr 1999 17:28:46 -0400

Hmm; here is Jeremy Allison's quote, describing something
he did with an SGI he was testing:

"Like Mindcraft, we also bound the interrupts from each network card
to a processor. This allows concurrent interrupts not to cause a
processor cache flush, which is an expensive operation."

I'm not a kernel internals genius; just trying to get a feel for
what impact these things have on system performance.

Thanks for the reply!
Mark

mark@hoist.nlcomm.com wrote:
>
> OK, after reading the Mindcraft fallout, it is interesting that
> NT can bind a network card to a particular CPU.
>
> Can Linux do this too? How would the administrator be able to balance
> the load between the two?

It is better to dynamically share the CPU. NT has shortcomings which
can be reduced a bit by that kind of tuning.

Roger.

--
** R.E.Wolff@BitWizard.nl ** http://www.BitWizard.nl/ ** +31-15-2137555 **
*-- BitWizard writes Linux device drivers for any device you may have! --*
------ Microsoft SELLS you Windows, Linux GIVES you the whole house ------

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/