From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Nov 7 11:06:00 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67F8216A4F3 for ; Fri, 7 Nov 2003 11:06:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from mail.speakeasy.net (mail6.speakeasy.net [216.254.0.206]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9761E43FB1 for ; Fri, 7 Nov 2003 11:05:59 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Received: (qmail 13878 invoked from network); 7 Nov 2003 19:05:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO server.baldwin.cx) ([216.27.160.63]) (envelope-sender )encrypted SMTP for ; 7 Nov 2003 19:05:58 -0000 Received: from laptop.baldwin.cx (gw1.twc.weather.com [216.133.140.1]) by server.baldwin.cx (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id hA7J5Yce095492; Fri, 7 Nov 2003 14:05:35 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: X-Mailer: XFMail 1.5.4 on FreeBSD X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <3FABC006.10509@liwing.de> Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 14:05:34 -0500 (EST) From: John Baldwin To: Jens Rehsack X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.55 (1.174.2.19-2003-05-19-exp) cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: RE: New interrupt code slows hyperthreading down X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 19:06:00 -0000 On 07-Nov-2003 Jens Rehsack wrote: > Hi, > > I recompiled my system today and when it came up again, > it was terrible slow. Using top I've seen, that there're > around 25% cpu-time is used to handle interrupts. > The kernel was configured using SMP ('cause it's a HTT > enabled CPU) and APIC. Setting machdep.hlt_logical_cpus > to 1 didn't change anything. Simply getting a few mails > (around 30) takes about 20 minutes. Most of time while > getting the mails my mozilla was in "*Giant" state, > what shouldn't be good, should it? > > I've recompiled the kernel without SMP and APIC and > now the system's behaviour is more "normal". Is the > behaviour of the new interrupt code better on real > multiprocessor systems? Can you do a 'vmstat -i' under your SMP kernel to see where all the interrupts are coming from? It sounds like a device is interrupt storming. There has been report of this so far with fwohci(4). -- John Baldwin <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.FreeBSD.org/