Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 20 Sep 2008 09:19:18 -0700 | From | Arjan van de Ven <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/2]: Remote softirq invocation infrastructure. |
| |
On Sat, 20 Sep 2008 09:02:09 -0700 Daniel Walker <dwalker@mvista.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 2008-09-20 at 08:45 -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > On Sat, 20 Sep 2008 08:29:21 -0700 > > > > > > > Jen's, as stated, has block layer uses for this. I intend to > > > > use this for receive side flow seperation on non-multiqueue > > > > network cards. And Steffen Klassert has a set of IPSEC > > > > parallelization changes that can very likely make use of this. > > > > > > What's the benefit that you (or Jens) sees from migrating softirqs > > > from specific cpu's to others? > > > > it means you do all the processing on the CPU that submitted the IO > > in the first place, and likely still has the various metadata > > pieces in its CPU cache (or at least you know you won't need to > > bounce them over) > > > In the case of networking and block I would think a lot of the softirq > activity is asserted from userspace.. Maybe the scheduler shouldn't be > migrating these tasks, or could take this softirq activity into > account ..
well a lot of it comes from completion interrupts.
and moving userspace isn't a good option; think of the case of 1 nic but 4 apache processes doing the work...
-- Arjan van de Ven Intel Open Source Technology Centre For development, discussion and tips for power savings, visit http://www.lesswatts.org
| |