From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Brice Goglin Subject: Re: Receive side performance issue with multi-10-GigE and NUMA Date: Fri, 07 Aug 2009 23:53:18 +0200 Message-ID: <4A7CA24E.4080503@inria.fr> References: <20090807170600.9a2eff2e.billfink@mindspring.com> <4A7C9A14.7070600@inria.fr> <20090807175112.a1f57407.billfink@mindspring.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Linux Network Developers , Yinghai Lu , gallatin@myri.com To: Bill Fink Return-path: Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr ([192.134.164.104]:12229 "EHLO mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932065AbZHGVxH (ORCPT ); Fri, 7 Aug 2009 17:53:07 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20090807175112.a1f57407.billfink@mindspring.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Bill Fink wrote: >> I've seen some cases in the past where numa_node was always 0 on >> quad-Opteron machines with a PCI bus on node 1. IIRC it got fixed in >> later kernels thanks to patches from Yinghai Lu (CC'ed). >> > > By later kernels do you mean 2.6.30 or 2.6.31? > No, I meant "later than when the problem occured". I was using 2.6.22 at this point and the problem was fixed somewhere around 2.6.25. >> Is the corresponding local_cpus sysfs file wrong as well ? >> > > All sysfs local_cpus values are the same (00000000,000000ff), > so yes they are also wrong. > And hyperthreading is enabled, right? Brice