From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S265071AbUBOQLc (ORCPT ); Sun, 15 Feb 2004 11:11:32 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S265083AbUBOQLc (ORCPT ); Sun, 15 Feb 2004 11:11:32 -0500 Received: from web14903.mail.yahoo.com ([216.136.225.55]:65171 "HELO web14903.mail.yahoo.com") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S265071AbUBOQLb (ORCPT ); Sun, 15 Feb 2004 11:11:31 -0500 Message-ID: <20040215161130.44413.qmail@web14903.mail.yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2004 08:11:30 -0800 (PST) From: Jon Smirl Subject: Re: [BK PATCHES] 2.6.x libata update To: Jeff Garzik Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing Lists MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >Is this right? My ATA drive is on ide0. Because of the RAID my IDE and SATA drives should >have about the same number of interrupts. But half of my IDE interrupts are showing up on >ide1, on CPU #1. There shouldn't be any interrupts showing up on CPU#1 with hyperthreading. I didn't read that right, half are on ide0 and half on ide1 and only one on CPU #1. My drive is on ide0, is it right to get half on ide1? ===== Jon Smirl jonsmirl@yahoo.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online. http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html