linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] irqbalance: Mark in-kernel irqbalance as obsolete, set to N by default

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 04 Aug 2006 23:48:16 +0200
From:	Bodo Eggert <7eggert@...tempel.de>
To:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
	Auke Kok <auke-jan.h.kok@...el.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jesse.brandeburg@...el.com,
	john.ronciak@...el.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] irqbalance: Mark in-kernel irqbalance as obsolete, set  to N by default

Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com> wrote:

> to some degree the in kernel balancer cannot really make the level of
> decisions that a userspace balancer can make, at least not without making all
> kernel developers vomit ;)

If you make the drivers set a flag if they know their interrupts should remain
mostly on one CPU, you can avoid the bad cases, and the rest you could gain
from using more clever algorithms should be(*) usurally less than what parsing
/proc/interrupts costs.

*) as in: I guess
-- 
Ich danke GMX dafür, die Verwendung meiner Adressen mittels per SPF
verbreiteten Lügen zu sabotieren.

http://david.woodhou.se/why-not-spf.html
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/