Re: userspace irq balancer

Dave Hansen (haveblue@us.ibm.com)
19 May 2003 23:36:23 -0700

On Mon, 2003-05-19 at 23:13, David S. Miller wrote:
> From: "Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@aracnet.com>
> Date: Mon, 19 May 2003 22:53:11 -0700
>
> I have no frigging idea why you'd want to tear something out that
> works well already, and has a shitload of work put into it.
>
> It's pretty fundamentally broken for having had so much work
> put into it. Show me something other than "SpecWEB run for IBM
> ran faster" as a reason for keeping this code in there. Can you
> even do this?

I don't even think we can do that. That code was being integrated
around the same time that our Specweb setup decided to go south on us
and start physically frying itself. We never got a chance to run it.
BTW, I don't think there are any other kernel developers running Specweb
on 2.5 kernels. If there are, please speak up!

Andrew Theurer posted some positive results here, which were quite
marginal in the case with 1 nic. 4.7% with two.
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=104212930819212&w=2

-- 
Dave Hansen
haveblue@us.ibm.com


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/