From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Kok, Auke" Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: Bad network performance over 2Gbps Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2008 09:38:49 -0700 Message-ID: <480CC319.5020500@intel.com> References: <1208282804.23631.27.camel@localhost> <175f5a0f0804151315x1e192fc7p7dac1e84fd154211@mail.gmail.com> <48051173.5030802@intel.com> <48051734.1000107@redhat.com> <1208426550.6049.10.camel@localhost> <48078AF6.2020003@intel.com> <20080421131937.GA4685@ucw.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , "H. Peter Anvin" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Anton Titov , Chris Snook , "H. Willstrand" , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Jesse Brandeburg , Linus Torvalds , Andrew Morton To: Pavel Machek Return-path: Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:10870 "EHLO mga11.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753369AbYDUQkG (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Apr 2008 12:40:06 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20080421131937.GA4685@ucw.cz> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Pavel Machek wrote: > Hi! > >> [X86] IRQBALANCE: Mark as BROKEN and disable by default >> >> The IRQBALANCE option causes interrupts to bounce all around on SMP systems >> quickly burying the CPU in migration cost and cache misses. Mainly affected are >> network interrupts and this results in one CPU pegged in softirqd completely. >> >> Disable this option and provide documentation to a better solution (userspace >> irqbalance daemon does overall the best job to begin with and only manual setting >> of smp_affinity will beat it). >> >> Signed-off-by: Auke Kok >> >> --- >> >> diff --git a/arch/x86/Kconfig b/arch/x86/Kconfig >> index 6c70fed..956aa22 100644 >> --- a/arch/x86/Kconfig >> +++ b/arch/x86/Kconfig >> @@ -1026,13 +1026,17 @@ config EFI >> platforms. >> >> config IRQBALANCE >> - def_bool y >> + def_bool n > > ACK. >> prompt "Enable kernel irq balancing" >> - depends on X86_32 && SMP && X86_IO_APIC >> + depends on X86_32 && SMP && X86_IO_APIC && BROKEN > > This is wrong. irqbalance works, there's nothing wrong with it; but it > has nasty sideffects. ok, I'm fine with taking that part out of the patch. Ingo, want me to send an updated patch? > >> help >> The default yes will allow the kernel to do irq load balancing. >> Saying no will keep the kernel from doing irq load balancing. >> >> + This option is known to cause performance issues on SMP >> + systems. The preferred method is to use the userspace >> + 'irqbalance' daemon instead. See http://irqbalance.org/. >> + > > ACK. >