From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 23 17:50:42 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org 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 01DCC16A41F; Thu, 23 Mar 2006 17:50:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from flag@longino.wired.org) Received: from mail.oltrelinux.com (krisma.oltrelinux.com [194.242.226.43]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC12A43D45; Thu, 23 Mar 2006 17:50:39 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from flag@longino.wired.org) Received: from longino.wired.org (ip-114-46.sn1.eutelia.it [62.94.114.46]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.oltrelinux.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4068611B1B9; Thu, 23 Mar 2006 18:50:38 +0100 (CET) Received: from longino.wired.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by longino.wired.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k2NHoS4r001118; Thu, 23 Mar 2006 18:50:29 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from flag@longino.wired.org) Received: (from flag@localhost) by longino.wired.org (8.13.4/8.13.4/Submit) id k2NHoNBT001117; Thu, 23 Mar 2006 18:50:23 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from flag) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 18:50:23 +0100 From: Paolo Pisati To: FreeBSD_Current Message-ID: <20060323175023.GA1039@tin.it> References: <20060322122906.A41691@xorpc.icir.org> <200603221545.13769.jhb@freebsd.org> <20060323003228.GA1983@tin.it> <200603231112.26646.jhb@freebsd.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200603231112.26646.jhb@freebsd.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p10 (Debian) at krisma.oltrelinux.com Cc: Subject: Re: interesting(?) data on network interrupt servicing X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 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: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 17:50:42 -0000 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