linux-kernel - Re: Why the number of /proc/interrupts doesn't change when nic is under heavy workload?

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:	Mon, 16 Jan 2012 07:53:28 +0100
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Yuehai Xu <yuehaixu@...il.com>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	yhxu@...ne.edu
Subject: Re: Why the number of /proc/interrupts doesn't change when nic is
 under heavy workload?

Le dimanche 15 janvier 2012 à 17:27 -0500, Yuehai Xu a écrit :
> Thanks for replying! Please see below:

> My memcached uses 8 different UDP sockets(8 different UDP ports), so
> there should be no lock contention for a single UDP rx-queue.

Ah, I missed this mail, so you really should post here result of "perf
top -C 0", after you make sure your NIC interrupts are handled by cpu 0.

Also, what speed is your link, and how many UDP messages per second do
you receive ?



--
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/