From: Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@gmail.com>
To: "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@xmission.com>
Cc: David Daney <ddaney@caviumnetworks.com>,
Chris Friesen <cfriesen@nortel.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mips <linux-mips@linux-mips.org>
Subject: Re: Irq architecture for multi-core network driver.
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 10:28:10 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4807377b0910231028g60b479cfycdbf3f4e25384c58@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m13a5apmm0.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org>
On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 12:59 AM, Eric W. Biederman
<ebiederm@xmission.com> wrote:
> David Daney <ddaney@caviumnetworks.com> writes:
>> Certainly this is one mode of operation that should be supported, but I would
>> also like to be able to go for raw throughput and have as many cores as possible
>> reading from a single queue (like I currently have).
>
> I believe will detect false packet drops and ask for unnecessary
> retransmits if you have multiple cores processing a single queue,
> because you are processing the packets out of order.
So, the way the default linux kernel configures today's many core
server systems is to leave the affinity mask by default at 0xffffffff,
and most current Intel hardware based on 5000 (older core cpus), or
5500 chipset (used with Core i7 processors) that I have seen will
allow for round robin interrupts by default. This kind of sucks for
the above unless you run irqbalance or set smp_affinity by hand.
Yes, I know Arjan and others will say you should always run
irqbalance, but some people don't and some distros don't ship it
enabled by default (or their version doesn't work for one reason or
another) The question is should the kernel work better by default
*without* irqbalance loaded, or does it not matter?
I don't believe we should re-enable the kernel irq balancer, but
should we consider only setting a single bit in each new interrupt's
irq affinity? Doing it with a random spread for the initial affinity
would be better than setting them all to one.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-23 17:28 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-10-22 21:40 David Daney
2009-10-22 22:05 ` Chris Friesen
2009-10-22 22:24 ` David Daney
2009-10-23 7:59 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-10-23 17:28 ` Jesse Brandeburg [this message]
2009-10-23 23:22 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-10-24 13:26 ` David Miller
2009-10-24 3:19 ` David Miller
2009-10-24 13:23 ` David Miller
2009-12-16 22:08 ` Chetan Loke
2009-12-16 22:30 ` David Daney
2009-12-16 23:00 ` Stephen Hemminger
2009-12-16 23:26 ` David Daney
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=4807377b0910231028g60b479cfycdbf3f4e25384c58@mail.gmail.com \
--to=jesse.brandeburg@gmail.com \
--cc=cfriesen@nortel.com \
--cc=ddaney@caviumnetworks.com \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mips@linux-mips.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/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®