linux-kernel - Re: irq balancing question

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Fri, 23 Feb 2007 22:57:16 +0200
From:	Gergely Imre <imre.gergely@...ral.ro>
To:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hancockr@...w.ca
Subject: Re: irq balancing question



Arjan van de Ven wrote:
>> and i guess it doesn't matter if the distribution is being done by the
>> hardware, from the point of view of the kernel, i would still get the
>> performance penalty.
> 
> for the cache bouncing you save assuming you have an Intel cpu (eg one
> where the cache is shared). You don't save on the cross-cpu reassembly,
> that is an entire different algorithm path you hit there..
> 
> 
> 
>> i'm just trying to figure it out, i have no real knowledge of the inner
>> kernel workings, so i dont know. but i really would like to use all 4 cores.
>> just how expensive is that reassembly path ?
> 
> depends on your traffic to be honest, probably a question more suited
> for net-dev list.
> 

i'll look into it, thanks a lot for the comments.
-
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/