[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100927220113.GD30050@sgi.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 15:01:13 -0700
From: Arthur Kepner <akepner@....com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCHv2] x86/irq: round-robin distribution of irqs to
cpus w/in node
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 10:46:02PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> ...
> Sigh. Why is this a x86 specific problem ?
>
It's obviously not. But we're particularly seeing it on x86
systems, so an x86-specific fix would address our problem.
> If we setup an irq on a node then we should set the affinity to the
> target node in general.
OK.
> .... The round robin inside the node is really not
> a problem unless you hit:
>
> nr_irqs_per_node * nr_cpus_per_node > max_vectors_per_cpu
>
No, I don't think that's true.
The problem we're seeing is that one driver asks for a large
number of interrupts (on no CPU in particular). And because of the
way that the vectors are initially assigned to CPUs (in
__assign_irq_vector()), a particular CPU can have all its vectors
consumed.
Now, a second driver comes along, and requests an interrupt on
a specific CPU, N. But CPU N is out of interrupts, so that driver
fails.
This all happens before a user-space irq balancer is available.
--
Arthur
--
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