I'm making some tests now. What would be a clever tool/way to measure pps on a NIC? I was trying iptraf but it demands too much (99%) cpu so the results aren't accurate. On Tue, 2006-05-02 at 10:18 -0700, Auke Kok wrote: > Juan Pablo Abuyeres wrote: > > On Tue, 2006-05-02 at 08:43 -0700, Auke Kok wrote: > > > >> handled by whatever cpu is available, and the same goes for routing. Make sure > >> you run an irqbalance daemon to spread the rx interrupt load across the cpu's > >> if applicable. > > > > Thank you. > > > > Should IRQ's for a given network interface be distributed on all CPUs or > > only be handled by one CPU? I've read a lot of stuff about kernel irq > > balance (which just found out is now obsolete), smp_affinity and > > irqbalance userland daemon, but I'm still confused about what should I > > see in /proc/interrupts as an optimal behavior. Ar for now, I've only > > been able to handle interrupts for a given NIC by one CPU. > > optimally the irq of an interface should be tied to a single cpu, and other > interrupts of other nics should go to another, so that consistenly every cpu > is bound to a nic. The kernel balancer is obsolete and performs pourly because > it keeps moving irq's around without a real reason. smp_affinity is nice but a > one-shot tool, and may achieve theoretical max performance but you lose the > flexibility of irqbalance (the userspace daemon) that can spread all > interrupts over cpu's and thus can handle sudden loads of hdd usage or other > io interrupt floods. > > Auke > - > : send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html - : send the line "unsubscribe linux-net" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
