[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.WNT.2.00.0910161544330.13364@jbrandeb-mobl2.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 15:48:18 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time)
From: "Brandeburg, Jesse" <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>
To: Richard Scobie <richard@...ce.co.nz>
cc: Chris Friesen <cfriesen@...tel.com>,
e1000-list <e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
Linux Network Development list <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"Allan, Bruce W" <bruce.w.allan@...el.com>,
"Ronciak, John" <john.ronciak@...el.com>,
"Kirsher, Jeffrey T" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
"gospo@...hat.com" <gospo@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [E1000-devel] behaviour question for igb on nehalem box
On Fri, 16 Oct 2009, Richard Scobie wrote:
> I'm have just put together a Nehalem system (1 x Xeon),
> 2.6.30.8-64.fc11.x86_64, which has quad onboard 82576 and noticed during
> testing using just a single interface, that the RX queues on the other 3
> were receiving interrupts - observed in /proc/interrupts.
>
> Is this normal behaviour?
Hi Richard,
This is normal, since we trigger an interrupt on every queue during our
watchdog. So if the interface is up it should be triggering an interrupt
on every queue every two seconds.
This has (and will probably continue to be) necessary in order to pick up
any straggler packets due to any (extremely rare, but expected to occur)
missed interrupts that could happen when traffic is running. It also is
extremely useful if you're doing irq affinitization and/or debugging
interrupts.
you can bring down the interfaces and they will stop interrupting.
Jesse
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists