[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090703230408.4433ee39@infradead.org>
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 23:04:08 -0700
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>,
Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
"Styner, Douglas W" <douglas.w.styner@...el.com>,
Chinang Ma <chinang.ma@...el.com>,
"Prickett, Terry O" <terry.o.prickett@...el.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <matthew.r.wilcox@...el.com>,
Eric.Moore@....com, DL-MPTFusionLinux@....com
Subject: Re: >10% performance degradation since 2.6.18
On Sat, 4 Jul 2009 01:35:05 +0200
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> wrote:
> > ... so that you can't do power management on a per socket basis?
> > hardly a good idea.
>
> Interrupts should only happen when the socket did spent time
> submitting the work for them. Typically on drivers I'm familiar with
> the return MSI is tied to the CPU that did submit the work item
for networking, especially for incoming data such as new connections,
that isn't the case.. that's more or less randomly (well hash based)
distributed.
--
Arjan van de Ven Intel Open Source Technology Centre
For development, discussion and tips for power savings,
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
--
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