From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161421AbWBUIDt (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Feb 2006 03:03:49 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1161425AbWBUIDt (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Feb 2006 03:03:49 -0500 Received: from mail.astral.ro ([193.230.240.11]:38581 "EHLO mail.astral.ro") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161421AbWBUIDs (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Feb 2006 03:03:48 -0500 Message-ID: <43FAC963.40908@astral.ro> Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 10:03:47 +0200 From: Imre Gergely Organization: Astral Telecom SA User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (X11/20051025) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Arjan van de Ven CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: irq balance problems? References: <43FAC5AA.1030205@astral.ro> <1140508579.3082.12.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> In-Reply-To: <1140508579.3082.12.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.93.0.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Arjan van de Ven wrote: >> and irqbalance is not running, why aren't the interrupts coming from eth0 >> balanced between the two processors? at least that's what i understood from the >> examples in Documentation/IRQ-affinity.txt. are there any other settings/kernel >> parameters/compile option one has to set? > > it'll depend on the chipset. Some round-robin, some don't. > For performance it's better to not round-robin. is there a way to see for sure? or this behaviour is proof enough that it doesn't do round-robin?