From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 11 Jul 2002 05:00:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 11 Jul 2002 05:00:47 -0400 Received: from scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net ([207.217.120.49]:11495 "EHLO scaup.mail.pas.earthlink.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 11 Jul 2002 05:00:47 -0400 Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2002 05:02:14 -0400 To: andrea@suse.de, jamagallon@able.es Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: pipe and af/unix latency differences between aa and jam on smp Message-ID: <20020711090214.GA16423@rushmore> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i From: rwhron@earthlink.net Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > both pipe and afunix should not generate any irq load (other than > the IPI with the reschedule_task wakeups at least, but they're only > dependent on the scheduler there are some scheduler bits in irqbalance for cpu affinity. irqbalance is in the two jam patchsets with low latency, and not in the patchsets with higher latency. -- Randy Hron http://home.earthlink.net/~rwhron/kernel/bigbox.html