mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: uaca@alumni.uv.es
To: "Richard B. Johnson" <root@chaos.analogic.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: is irq smp affinity good for anything?
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 15:04:58 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030311140458.GA15465@pusa.informat.uv.es> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.95.1030311073427.16779A-100000@chaos>

On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 07:40:15AM -0500, Richard B. Johnson wrote:

Hi Richard, thanks so much for your reply

> On Tue, 11 Mar 2003 uaca@alumni.uv.es wrote:
[...]
> 
> 33 MHz machines easily handle 6,000 interrupts per second --
> unless you are trying to execute code within that interrupt
> that requires 1/6000th of a second to execute!  Perhaps it's
> not a "latency" problem, but an interrupt code-bloat problem
> where most of the stuff should be executed out of the interrupt
> context.

it seems I explained too fuzzy/I had to explain it better

what I wanted to try is avoidoiding irq latency paths in the CPU where is
executing the ISR, where I'm interested not delaying time stamps by any other
means. 

And yes... maybe I'm a little paranoid about this, but doing an 
echo <something> > /proc/irqs/[0-9]*/smp_affinity is cheap
and it's supossed? I should get better results... or not?

anyway... 

I did not expect to increase global latency to these results...
and neither to increase latency in the CPU that's receiving 
just one interrupt!

	Ulisses 

PD: I'm not doing a driver, just measuring 

                Debian GNU/Linux: a dream come true
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Computers are useless. They can only give answers."            Pablo Picasso

--->	Visita http://www.valux.org/ para saber acerca de la	<---
--->	Asociación Valenciana de Usuarios de Linux		<---
 

  reply	other threads:[~2003-03-11 13:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-03-10 22:22 IRQ affinity good for lowering interrupt latency? uaca
2003-03-11 12:19 ` is irq smp affinity good for anything? uaca
2003-03-11 12:40   ` Richard B. Johnson
2003-03-11 14:04     ` uaca [this message]
     [not found]       ` <Pine.LNX.4.44.0303112047240.15753-100000@coffee.psychology.mcmaster.ca>
2003-03-12 10:11         ` uaca
     [not found]           ` <Pine.LNX.4.44.0303120858480.19850-100000@coffee.psychology.mcmaster.ca>
2003-03-12 15:32             ` uaca
     [not found]           ` <3E7076E1.6F7C74B1@compro.net>
2003-03-13 15:47             ` uaca
2003-03-13 17:58               ` Mark Hounschell

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=20030311140458.GA15465@pusa.informat.uv.es \
    --to=uaca@alumni.uv.es \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=root@chaos.analogic.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®