On 8/25/17 10:59 AM, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > On Fri, 25 Aug 2017 14:24:28 +0000 > "Waskiewicz Jr, Peter" <peter.waskiewicz...@intel.com> wrote: > >> On 8/25/17 5:19 AM, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: >>>> >>>> Tested with Intel XL710 NIC with Cisco 3172 switch. >>>> >>>> It would be even slightly better if the irqbalance service is turned >>>> off outside. >>> >>> Yes, if you don't turn-off (kill) irqbalance it will move around the >>> IRQs behind your back... >> >> Or you can use the --banirq option to irqbalance to ignore your device's >> interrupts as targets for balancing. > > It might be worth mentioning that --banirq=X is specified for each IRQ > that you want to exclude, and --banirq is simply specified multiple > times on the command line. > > Is it possible to tell a running irqbalance that I want to excluded an > extra IRQ? (just before I do my manual adjustment).
It isn't possible today, since we don't have a way to attach a foreground/oneshot irqbalance run to a currently-running daemon. That's an interesting feature enhancement...I can add it to our list as a feature request so I don't forget about it. That way I can also get Neil's thoughts on this. -PJ
