Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 18:50:23 +0100 From: Paolo Pisati <p.pisati@oltrelinux.com> To: FreeBSD_Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: interesting(?) data on network interrupt servicing Message-ID: <20060323175023.GA1039@tin.it> In-Reply-To: <200603231112.26646.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <20060322122906.A41691@xorpc.icir.org> <200603221545.13769.jhb@freebsd.org> <20060323003228.GA1983@tin.it> <200603231112.26646.jhb@freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Mar 23, 2006 at 11:12:24AM -0500, John Baldwin wrote:
> You probably want preemption on to minimize latency.
i'm doing preemption now...
> If this is a
> UP machine, you should turn SMP off. It might be interesting to
> compare using 7.x without APIC as well, since you are not using
> APIC on 4.x.
ok, and what do we expect from it?
besides interrupt masking/eoi, what are the other areas influenced
by apic<->8259 switch?
moreover, should i profile the asm part too?
APIC 8259
| |
| |
ISR_VEC() INTR()
| |
| | we don't take any measure
========================================== <= above this threshold...
lapic_handle_intr() atpic_handle_intr()
\ /
\ /
intr_execute_handlers()
|
|
.
.
.
--
Paolo
"le influenze esterne sono troppe, il mondo reale non e' mica
quello fatato dei komunisti :-p" - Anonymous Lumbard
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060323175023.GA1039>