[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <0d9baad4-fba7-d362-41b7-f0b37446c5ef@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 16:11:57 -0700
From: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@...el.com>
To: Rakesh Pillai <pillair@...eaurora.org>,
'Rajkumar Manoharan' <rmanohar@...eaurora.org>
Cc: ath10k@...ts.infradead.org, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvalo@...eaurora.org,
johannes@...solutions.net, davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, dianders@...omium.org,
evgreen@...omium.org, linux-wireless-owner@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 2/7] ath10k: Add support to process rx packet in thread
On 7/23/2020 11:25 AM, Rakesh Pillai wrote:
> Hi Rajkumar,
> In linux, the IRQs are directed to the first core which is booted.
> I see that all the IRQs are getting routed to CORE0 even if its heavily
> loaded.
>
You should be able to configure the initial IRQ setup so that they don't
all go on CPU 0 when you create the IRQ. That obviously doesn't help the
case of wanting scheduler to dynamically move the processing around to
other CPUs though.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists