From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Kok, Auke" Subject: Re: e1000 performance issue in 4 simultaneous links Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 08:57:45 -0800 Message-ID: <47A0AC89.6080806@intel.com> References: <36D9DB17C6DE9E40B059440DB8D95F5204275B04@orsmsx418.amr.corp.intel.com> <20080110.172830.16409182.davem@davemloft.net> <20080111.174109.57502326.davem@davemloft.net> <20080112050841.M73900@visp.net.lb> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: David Miller , benny+usenet@amorsen.dk, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Denys Fedoryshchenko Return-path: Received: from mga02.intel.com ([134.134.136.20]:32769 "EHLO mga02.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754196AbYA3Q6d (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Jan 2008 11:58:33 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20080112050841.M73900@visp.net.lb> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Denys Fedoryshchenko wrote: > Sorry. that i interfere in this subject. > > Do you recommend CONFIG_IRQBALANCE to be enabled? I certainly do not. Manual tweaking and pinning the irq's to the correct CPU will give the best performance (for specific loads). The userspace irqbalance daemon tries very hard to approximate this behaviour and is what I recommend for most situations, it usually does the right thing and does so without making your head spin (just start it). The in-kernel one usually does the wrong thing for network loads. Cheers, Auke