linux-kernel - Re: IRQ balancing on a router

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

Date:	Tue, 07 Oct 2008 12:29:39 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:	Jan Kasprzak <kas@...muni.cz>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: IRQ balancing on a router

On Fri, 2008-10-03 at 06:38 -0700, Arjan van de Ven wrote:

> The good news is that irqthreads at least have the potential to solve
> this "lack of information"; if not, we could consider doing a form of
> microaccounting for irq handlers....

I have some patches floating about that account for nmi/irq/softirq time
in a fine grained scale. The trouble is that i've so far not found a way
to handle the case of a jiffie based sched_clock().

The trouble with that is that time always increases in IRQ context, so
nmi=0, softirq=0, regular=0 but irq=100%, which is obviuosly
sub-optimal :-)

--
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/