Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 6 Feb 2006 14:46:36 -0500 (EST)
From:      Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@cs.duke.edu>
To:        Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org>
Cc:        freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: machdep.cpu_idle_hlt and SMP perf?
Message-ID:  <17383.42908.349070.31155@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu>
In-Reply-To: <43E74872.7000002@freebsd.org>
References:  <17379.56708.421007.613310@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <43E74872.7000002@freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

Andre Oppermann writes:
 > Andrew Gallatin wrote:
 > > Why dooes machdep.cpu_idle_hlt=1 drop my 10GbE network rx
 > > performance by a considerable amount (7.5Gbs -> 5.5Gbs)?

<...>

 > This may be the same problem OpenBSD has fixed last year in the handling
 > of the idle loop.  From the kerneltrap posting:

<....>

 > First commit message:
 >   http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=openbsd-cvs&m=111692513727274&w=2
 > 
 > The MFC with all changes in one commit message:
 >   http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=openbsd-cvs&m=111859519015510&w=2

The bug they fixes was missing interrupts by both calling APM's idle
routine, which may hlt, and hlt'ing in the idle loop itself.  Since I
have no idea what acpi is doing, I got excited about this.

Alas, it seems like this isn't it.  I pointed cpu_idle_hook back to
cpu_idle_default and away from acpi_cpu_idle, but that made no
difference.

Drew





Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?17383.42908.349070.31155>