From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Sep 15 05:32:31 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABAFB16A4CE for ; Wed, 15 Sep 2004 05:32:31 +0000 (GMT) Received: from szamoca.krvarr.bc.ca (s142-179-111-232.bc.hsia.telus.net [142.179.111.232]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35E6443D2D for ; Wed, 15 Sep 2004 05:32:29 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from sandy@krvarr.bc.ca) Received: from szamoca.krvarr.bc.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by szamoca.krvarr.bc.ca (8.13.1/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i8F5W6u2001076; Tue, 14 Sep 2004 22:32:06 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sandy@szamoca.krvarr.bc.ca) Received: (from sandy@localhost) by szamoca.krvarr.bc.ca (8.13.1/8.12.11/Submit) id i8F5W65p001073; Tue, 14 Sep 2004 22:32:06 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from sandy) From: Sandy Rutherford MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <16711.54230.199600.66674@szamoca.krvarr.bc.ca> Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 22:32:06 -0700 To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: References: <41479332.3070108@dreamchaser.org> X-Mailer: VM 7.07 under Emacs 21.3.1 cc: Gary Aitken Subject: Re: shared irqs and performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2004 05:32:31 -0000 >>>>> On Wed, 15 Sep 2004 10:21:52 +0530, >>>>> Subhro said: > The card won't be facing any stability problems. And there is no > reason why you should force the card to another IRQ because modern > motherboards DOES allow IRQ sharing and there is no performance hits > for it. That's supposed to be the case and is usually the case. However, when left to its own devices, my Supermicro P6DBE board would always share an IRQ between a triple channel Mylex extremeRAID 1100 controller and one of the channels of a dual channel ZX348 ethernet card. When this happened, I would always see about 20% dropped packets on the ethernet channel sharing the IRQ. Manually overriding the IRQ assignment so that the RAID controller didn't share an IRQ with anything solved the problem. None-the-less, if there is no obvious evidence of odd behaviour, IRQ sharing is perfectly fine. However, if things are clearly not performing as they should, investigating potential IRQ sharing problems is not a bad idea. ...Sandy > Regards > S. > On Tue, 14 Sep 2004 18:56:18 -0600, Gary Aitken wrote: >> On my 4.10 system, I added in a third ethernet device. >> >> However, I see from dmesg that the irq assigned is shared with my >> scsi controller: >> >> de1: port 0xf880-0xf8ff mem >> 0xfdfffc00-0xfdfffc7f irq 9 at device 16.0 on pci0 >> bt0: port 0xfcec-0xfcef >> irq 9 at device 17.0 on pci0 >> >> Since the driver was already present, things went ok, in the sense >> that the system booted and scsi devices still work. >> >> 1. Will this work reliably (I haven't actually hooked anything >> to the new network card yet)? >> 2. Even if it does work, I assume it would be better to force >> it to an unused irq for performance reasons? >> >> Thanks, >> >> Gary >> _______________________________________________ >> freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list >> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >> > -- > Subhro Sankha Kar > School of Information Technology > Block AQ-13/1 Sector V > ZIP 700091 > India > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"