Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 17 Apr 2001 18:52:54 -0700
From:      Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net>
To:        "E.B. Dreger" <eddy+public+spam@noc.everquick.net>
Cc:        Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com>, Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com>, "Justin T. Gibbs" <gibbs@scsiguy.com>, Doug Barton <DougB@DougBarton.net>, "current @ freebsd . org" <current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject:   Re: Kernel preemption, yes or no? (was: Filesystem gets a huge performance boost)
Message-ID:  <20010417185254.E976@fw.wintelcom.net>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.20.0104180143210.14364-100000@www.everquick.net>; from eddy%2Bpublic%2Bspam@noc.everquick.net on Wed, Apr 18, 2001 at 01:48:06AM %2B0000
References:  <20010417182840.A976@fw.wintelcom.net> <Pine.LNX.4.20.0104180143210.14364-100000@www.everquick.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* E.B. Dreger <eddy+public+spam@noc.everquick.net> [010417 18:48] wrote:
> > Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2001 18:28:40 -0700
> > From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@wintelcom.net>
> > 
> >     1) interrupts are again fan-in, meaning if you block an interrupt
> >     class on one cpu you block them on all cpus
> 
> When would this be a bad case?  i.e., if an interrupt [class] must be
> blocked, would we not it blocked across the board?

It'd be nice if you had something like 16 nic cards working
independantly of each other to not be in the same collision domain
if they don't have to.

-- 
-Alfred Perlstein - [bright@wintelcom.net|alfred@freebsd.org]
Daemon News Magazine in your snail-mail! http://magazine.daemonnews.org/

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20010417185254.E976>