From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S268315AbUH2Uqg (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Aug 2004 16:46:36 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S268305AbUH2Um5 (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Aug 2004 16:42:57 -0400 Received: from parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk ([195.92.249.252]:17635 "EHLO www.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S268304AbUH2Umb (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 Aug 2004 16:42:31 -0400 Message-ID: <41323FA8.80203@pobox.com> Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 16:42:16 -0400 From: Jeff Garzik User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040803 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Linux Kernel CC: Ingo Molnar Subject: interrupt cpu time accounting? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Does the kernel scheduler notice when a CPU spends a lot of time doing interrupt processing? For many network configurations you get the best cache affinity, etc. if you lock network interrupts to a single CPU. However, on a box with high network load, that could mean that that CPU is spending more time processing interrupts than doing Real Work(tm). Will the scheduler "notice" this, and increasingly schedule processes away from the interrupt-heavy CPU? Jeff