From: Andrew Morton <akpm@digeo.com>
To: "Kamble, Nitin A" <nitin.a.kamble@intel.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kai.bankett@ontika.net,
mingo@redhat.com, jun.nakajima@intel.com,
asit.k.mallick@intel.com, sunil.saxena@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH][IO_APIC] 2.5.63bk7 irq_balance improvments / bug-fixes
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2003 15:51:50 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030304155150.33c81675.akpm@digeo.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E88224AA79D2744187E7854CA8D9131DA8B7DE@fmsmsx407.fm.intel.com>
"Kamble, Nitin A" <nitin.a.kamble@intel.com> wrote:
>
> Both the solutions will eliminate the bouncing behavior. The current
> implementation is based on the option 2, with the only difference of
> lower rate of distribution (5 sec). The optimal option is workload
> dependant. With static and heavy interrupt load, the option 2 looks
> better, while with random interrupt load the option 1 is good enough.
OK, thanks.
Now there has been some discssion as to whether these algorithmic decisions
can be moved out of the kernel altogether. And with periods of one and five
seconds that does appear to be feasible.
I believe that you have looked at this before and encountered some problem
with it. Could you please describe what happened there?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-03-04 23:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-03-04 23:33 Kamble, Nitin A
2003-03-04 23:51 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2003-03-05 10:48 ` Kai Bankett
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-03-06 20:01 Nakajima, Jun
2003-03-05 19:57 Kamble, Nitin A
2003-03-05 4:21 Kamble, Nitin A
2003-03-05 4:38 ` Jeff Garzik
2003-03-05 15:46 ` Jason Lunz
2003-03-05 18:26 ` Arjan van de Ven
2003-03-04 16:33 Kai Bankett
2003-03-04 16:45 ` Jeff Garzik
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20030304155150.33c81675.akpm@digeo.com \
--to=akpm@digeo.com \
--cc=asit.k.mallick@intel.com \
--cc=jun.nakajima@intel.com \
--cc=kai.bankett@ontika.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=nitin.a.kamble@intel.com \
--cc=sunil.saxena@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®