From owner-freebsd-hackers Tue Aug 7 11:46:18 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from perninha.conectiva.com.br (perninha.conectiva.com.br [200.250.58.156]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83D8F37B409 for ; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 11:46:06 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from riel@conectiva.com.br) Received: from burns.conectiva (burns.conectiva [10.0.0.4]) by perninha.conectiva.com.br (Postfix) with SMTP id 3E5F338CC5 for ; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 15:45:57 -0300 (EST) Received: (qmail 6790 invoked by uid 0); 7 Aug 2001 18:45:05 -0000 Received: from duckman.distro.conectiva (HELO duckman.conectiva.com.br) (root@10.0.17.2) by burns.conectiva with SMTP; 7 Aug 2001 18:45:05 -0000 Received: from localhost (riel@localhost) by duckman.conectiva.com.br (8.11.4/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f77IjuW05846; Tue, 7 Aug 2001 15:45:56 -0300 X-Authentication-Warning: duckman.distro.conectiva: riel owned process doing -bs Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2001 15:45:56 -0300 (BRST) From: Rik van Riel X-X-Sender: To: Terry Lambert Cc: Matt Dillon , Mike Smith , Zhihui Zhang , Subject: Re: Allocate a page at interrupt time In-Reply-To: <3B703029.2BB6D25A@mindspring.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, 7 Aug 2001, Terry Lambert wrote: > Matt Dillon wrote: > > All the cpu's don't get the interrupt, only one does. > > I think that you will end up taking an IPI (Inter Processor > Interrupt) to shoot down the cache line during an invalidate > cycle, when moving an interrupt processing thread from one > CPU to another. You have a lot of fantasy today. You may want to consider reading one of the white papers you referred us to with so much enthusiasm and trying again later ;) > > Well, if you happen to have four NICs and four CPUs, and > > you are running them all full bore, I would say that > > wiring the NICs to the CPUs would be a good idea. That > > seems like a rather specialized situation, though. > > I don't think so. These days, interrupt overhead can come > from many places, Exactly. You never know where your interrupts come from, so wiring them in a fixed setup really isn't going to do you much good in the generic case. Now if you want to optimise your source code for something like a Mindcraft "benchmark" ... regards, Rik -- Executive summary of a recent Microsoft press release: "we are concerned about the GNU General Public License (GPL)" http://www.surriel.com/ http://www.conectiva.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message