From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 17 May 2002 10:37:16 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 17 May 2002 10:37:13 -0400 Received: from penguin.e-mind.com ([195.223.140.120]:26474 "EHLO penguin.e-mind.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 17 May 2002 10:35:56 -0400 Date: Fri, 17 May 2002 16:35:38 +0200 From: Andrea Arcangeli To: Alan Cox Cc: Andrew Morton , Paul Faure , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Process priority in 2.4.18 (RedHat 7.3) Message-ID: <20020517143537.GG11512@dualathlon.random> In-Reply-To: <20020517125529.GC11512@dualathlon.random> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.27i X-GnuPG-Key-URL: http://e-mind.com/~andrea/aa.gnupg.asc X-PGP-Key-URL: http://e-mind.com/~andrea/aa.asc Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, May 17, 2002 at 03:51:20PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: > > > For a 10Mbit ne2k it ought to be if its done with sched fifo. For serious > > > devices its not. The ksoftirqd bounce blows everything out of cache and is > > > easily measured > > > > if you're under a flood of irq ksoftirqd or not won't make differences > > I didnt mention a flood of irqs. If stuff falls back to softirqd it > materially harms throughput You did implicitly becuse if there's not a flood of irq or recursive softirqs it cannot fall to sofitrqd. Andrea