From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: vladimir@acm.org Subject: Re: Why is "noapic" with some Dual P3 boards necessary? Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2002 18:54:11 -0800 Sender: linux-smp-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <200210310254.g9V2sBo19785@bach.leonora.org> References: Return-path: In-Reply-To: Message from Bill Davidsen of "Wed, 30 Oct 2002 14:20:01 EST." List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Bill Davidsen Cc: "Dr. Michael Weller" , Matthias Kleine , linux-smp@vger.kernel.org "BD" == Bill Davidsen writes: BD> What isn't clear is why anyone should make the big effort. I changed a BD> bunch of SMP machines, IBM Netfinitiy type, in hopes of a big improvement BD> in stability. I didn't see that, nor did I see any measurable change in BD> performance. If it works with noapic, why make a big effort to change? I have been told that balancing the interrupts across CPUs makes a difference on servers. --- Vladimir ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Vladimir G. Ivanovic http://leonora.org/~vladimir 2770 Cowper St. vladimir@acm.org Palo Alto, CA 94306-2447 +1 650 678 8014