| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <1170785364.7324.31.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 19:09:24 +0100 From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com> To: Marc Donner <donner@...-breitband.de> Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: cpu load balancing problem on smp On Tue, 2007-02-06 at 18:32 +0100, Marc Donner wrote: > Hi @all > > we have detected some problems on our live systems and so i have build a test > setup in our lab as follow: > > 3 Core 2 duo servers, each with 2 CPUs, with GE interfaces. 2 of them are > only for generating network traffic. the 3rd server is the one i want to > test. it is connected over two GE links to the other servers. the testserver > is configured as an ip router. running kernel 2.6.20. > > now if i let traffic flow over the box, about 600Mbit/s and about 120k > packets/s all seems to be ok. the load is balanced over all cpus. if now > insert some iptables rules, about 500, the softirq load increases, but all > seems to be ok. now i insert some rules more, and suddenly 1 CPU is 100% > loaded and the other ones are 99% idle. the load toggles now between the cpus > in intervals. I wonder if you are using irqbalance.. if not you probably want to... (this should at least split it over 2 cpus) see http://www.irqbalance.org to get irqbalance - 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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists