From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934570AbYEUGef (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 May 2008 02:34:35 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1758481AbYEUGe1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 May 2008 02:34:27 -0400 Received: from relay2.sgi.com ([192.48.171.30]:34663 "EHLO relay.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758202AbYEUGe0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 May 2008 02:34:26 -0400 Date: Wed, 21 May 2008 01:34:24 -0500 From: Paul Jackson To: Max Krasnyanskiy Cc: a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, menage@google.com, mingo@elte.hu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: IRQ affinities Message-Id: <20080521013424.6600780a.pj@sgi.com> In-Reply-To: <48337792.20606@qualcomm.com> References: <47D73086.2030008@qualcomm.com> <6599ad830803111827n1cb8e2c7i47c2ef3f3bb58995@mail.gmail.com> <47D7411E.1000009@qualcomm.com> <6599ad830803111936jd940deam8584bc971c3b6f41@mail.gmail.com> <47D74595.4080100@qualcomm.com> <6599ad830803112009y18d9e43ft8e3fc4a551d891da@mail.gmail.com> <20080311235939.1ebee8e3.pj@sgi.com> <47D81FE1.6030205@qualcomm.com> <20080312135746.89456f2a.pj@sgi.com> <47D82AD2.1070108@qualcomm.com> <20080312143253.3dd72c7f.pj@sgi.com> <47D83858.4030806@qualcomm.com> <20080312153712.bc5df7a1.pj@sgi.com> <47D8593A.6040503@qualcomm.com> <20080312183059.6716d630.pj@sgi.com> <47D87BE5.4010702@qualcomm.com> <20080313020300.92244956.pj@sgi.com> <47FE5655.10900@qualcomm.com> <20080414133902.7878cfce.pj@sgi.com> <1210329926.13978.224.camel@twins> <20080509061727.5057de1f.pj@sgi.com> <48337792.20606@qualcomm.com> Organization: SGI X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.4 (GTK+ 2.12.0; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Max wrote: > What I realized now is that all I need is > /proc/irq/default_smp_affinity. I suspect that something like you're proposing to do here will answer your needs, to "tell the kernel to not route IRQs to certain CPUs." I suspect that other folks will have some additional needs, that perhaps my idea of May 9, 2008: How about this. We add two files to each cpuset: irq_affinity_include # IRQs to direct to CPUs in this cpuset irq_affinity_exclude # IRQs -not- to direct to these CPUs where irq_affinity_exclude overrides irq_affinity_include. could meet. It makes sense to me to deal with your "default_smp_affinity" patch first, and then come back around and see what remains to be done, and how to do it, perhaps with additional cpuset based mechanisms such as the above two irq_affinity_* IRQ masks. > I'm in the process of making a patch for exposing default affinity mask. Peter, et al: how does Max's planned "default_smp_affinity" patch sound to you, as the next step we take on this? -- I won't rest till it's the best ... Programmer, Linux Scalability Paul Jackson 1.940.382.4214