public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dong_Wei <Dong_Wei@nj.cpsecure.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: dynamically use the irqbalance
Date: Mon, 10 Sep 2007 09:59:57 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <46E4A51D.2050804@nj.cpsecure.com> (raw)

Hi, all.
   I want to dynamically use irqbalance on X86 processor. My design is 
like the following:
   1) if we boot kernel with "noirqbalance", then irqbalance is always 
disabled.
   2) if we boot kernel without "noirqbalance", we can enable/disable 
irqbalance in runtime.

I create a proc_fs entry /proc/sys/kernel/irqbalance
This symbol I adding is in file arch/i386/kernel/io_apic.c
/proc/sys/kernel/irqbalance = 0 /* disable irqbalance in runtime */
/proc/sys/kernel/irqbalance = 1 /* enable irqbalance in runtime */

The core function is like the following:
irqbalance_irq_flag = -1; /* this is the last time irqbalance used */
irqbalance_enable = 1; /* set it to enable by default */
static int balanced_irq(void *unused)
{
     int i;
     unsigned long prev_balance_time = jiffies;
     long time_remaining = balanced_irq_interval;

     daemonize("kirqd");

     /* push everything to CPU 0 to give us a starting point.  */
     for (i = 0 ; i < NR_IRQS ; i++) {
         irq_desc[i].pending_mask = cpumask_of_cpu(0);
         set_pending_irq(i, cpumask_of_cpu(0));
     }

     for ( ; ; ) {
         time_remaining = schedule_timeout_interruptible(time_remaining);
         try_to_freeze();
         if(irqbalance_enable) {
              if (time_after(jiffies, 
prev_balance_time+balanced_irq_interval)) {
                  preempt_disable();
                  do_irq_balance();
                  prev_balance_time = jiffies;
                  time_remaining = balanced_irq_interval;
                  preempt_enable();
                  irqbalance_irq_flag = 1;
              }
          } else if (irqbalance_irq_flag != 0) {
              /* Is it SAFE to do so? */
              for (i = 0 ; i < NR_IRQS ; i++)
                  set_pending_irq(i, cpumask_of_cpu(0));
              irqbalance_irq_flag = 0;
          }
      }
      return 0;
}

When we change /proc/sys/kernel/irqbalance from 1 to 0, I move all the 
irqs to CPU#0, Is it safe to do so? or will lead to some very dangerous 
thing?

Please help me to review my design, thanks in advance.

BTW: I can't join the linux-kernel maillist, for our mail server now has 
  some problems. If anyone replies my mail. Pls CC to me.



             reply	other threads:[~2007-09-10  2:32 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-09-10  1:59 Dong_Wei [this message]
2007-09-10 15:09 ` dynamically use the irqbalance Arjan van de Ven
2007-09-11  1:08   ` Dong_Wei

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=46E4A51D.2050804@nj.cpsecure.com \
    --to=dong_wei@nj.cpsecure.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@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