From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Auke Kok Subject: Re: [RFC] irqbalance: Mark in-kernel irqbalance as obsolete, set to N by default Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2006 07:25:10 -0700 Message-ID: <44D358C6.3080406@intel.com> References: <44CE3F5E.4010305@intel.com> <20060803194550.9ff31bc1.akpm@osdl.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Auke Kok , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jesse.brandeburg@intel.com, john.ronciak@intel.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, arjan@linux.intel.com Return-path: Received: from mga03.intel.com ([143.182.124.21]:40868 "EHLO azsmga101-1.ch.intel.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030239AbWHDO0d (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 Aug 2006 10:26:33 -0400 To: Andrew Morton In-Reply-To: <20060803194550.9ff31bc1.akpm@osdl.org> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Andrew Morton wrote: > On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 10:35:26 -0700 > Auke Kok wrote: > >> We've recently seen a number of user bug reports against e1000 that the >> in-kernel irqbalance code is detrimental to network latency. The algorithm >> keeps swapping irq's for NICs from cpu to cpu causing extremely high network >> latency (>1000ms). > > What kernel versions? Some IRQ balancer fixes went in shortly after 2.6.17. user reports show 2.6.17.1 having the problem, I'm trying to get more details information, and will ask if 2.6.18rc3 or so does better for them. Cheers, Auke