From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arjan van de Ven Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2]: Remote softirq invocation infrastructure. Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2008 08:45:12 -0700 Message-ID: <20080920084512.58f7fb08@infradead.org> References: <20080919.234824.223177211.davem@davemloft.net> <1221924561.1343.121.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: David Miller , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, jens.axboe@oracle.com, steffen.klassert@secunet.com To: Daniel Walker Return-path: Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:51211 "EHLO casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750754AbYITPpK (ORCPT ); Sat, 20 Sep 2008 11:45:10 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1221924561.1343.121.camel@localhost.localdomain> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sat, 20 Sep 2008 08:29:21 -0700 > > > Jen's, as stated, has block layer uses for this. I intend to use > > this for receive side flow seperation on non-multiqueue network > > cards. And Steffen Klassert has a set of IPSEC parallelization > > changes that can very likely make use of this. > > What's the benefit that you (or Jens) sees from migrating softirqs > from specific cpu's to others? it means you do all the processing on the CPU that submitted the IO in the first place, and likely still has the various metadata pieces in its CPU cache (or at least you know you won't need to bounce them over) -- Arjan van de Ven Intel Open Source Technology Centre For development, discussion and tips for power savings, visit http://www.lesswatts.org