[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <379b81ae-b95e-4a55-ab42-597c58c3fe35@leemhuis.info>
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2024 07:15:44 +0100
From: "Linux regression tracking (Thorsten Leemhuis)"
<regressions@...mhuis.info>
To: Mathias Nyman <mathias.nyman@...ux.intel.com>,
Mikhail Gavrilov <mikhail.v.gavrilov@...il.com>
Cc: "Christian A. Ehrhardt" <lk@...e.de>, niklas.neronin@...ux.intel.com,
Linux List Kernel Mailing <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, linux-usb@...r.kernel.org,
Linux kernel regressions list <regressions@...ts.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: This is the fourth time Iâve tried to find what led to the regression of outgoing network speed and each time I find the merge commit 8c94ccc7cd691472461448f98e2372c75849406c
[CCing the regression list, as it should be in the loop for regressions:
https://docs.kernel.org/admin-guide/reporting-regressions.html]
On 08.02.24 16:43, Mathias Nyman wrote:
> On 8.2.2024 12.32, Mikhail Gavrilov wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 8, 2024 at 2:23 PM Mathias Nyman
>> <mathias.nyman@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> My guess is that CPU0 spends more time with interrupts disabled than
>>> other CPUs.
>>> Either because it's handling interrupts from some other hardware, or
>>> running
>>> code that disables interrupts (for example kernel code inside
>>> spin_lock_irq),
>>> and thus not able to handle network adapter interrupts at the same
>>> rate as CPU23
>>
>> Can this be fixed?
>
> Not sure, I'm not that familiar with this area.
> Maybe running irqbalance could help?
Mikhail, what's the status of this? I wonder if I should track this as a
regression to ensure Linus is aware of this.
Ciao, Thorsten (wearing his 'the Linux kernel's regression tracker' hat)
--
Everything you wanna know about Linux kernel regression tracking:
https://linux-regtracking.leemhuis.info/about/#tldr
If I did something stupid, please tell me, as explained on that page.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists