On 11/21/2015 12:09 PM, Hermann Meyer wrote: > > > Am 21.11.2015 um 11:57 schrieb Jeremy Jongepier: >> But doesn't that mean all IRQ requests are being handled by the first >> CPU? > > I'm not a expert in this, but here, without irqbalance, interrupts get > handled by all 4 CPU's, while the sound-card interrupt get handled only > by CPU1, the USB1 get handled by CPU0, eth0 get handled by CPU3, . . . Ah ok, so the IRQ requests are still being spread over all cores. If I were to believe this answer on Serverfault though you should only disable irqbalance if you're pinning applications or IRQ's to specific cores: http://serverfault.com/questions/513807/is-there-still-a-use-for-irqbalance-on-modern-hardware And as far as I know this is not advisable to do in a desktop context but usually applies to systems that are built for specific, single tasks. Jeremy
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Linux-audio-user mailing list Linux-audio-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user
