Re: RFC: IRQ affinity (aka interrupt routing)

2014-08-27 Thread Kengo NAKAHARA
Hi, Thank you for your idea. (2014/08/27 10:09), Matt Thomas wrote: As I've been reading this discussion, it seems very x86 centric. I've thinking about adding void intr_distribute(void *ih, const kcpuset_t *newset, kcpuset_t *oldset) for my ports that can do MP. This could be used to

Re: RFC: IRQ affinity (aka interrupt routing)

2014-08-27 Thread Matt Thomas
On Aug 26, 2014, at 11:16 PM, Kengo NAKAHARA k-nakah...@iij.ad.jp wrote: It seems good, except return value. IRQ affinity may fail (e.g. when all cpus are set nointr flag), so return value should not be void. then we should have a kcpuset_interruptable which is kcpuset_running minus those

Re: ixg(4) performances

2014-08-27 Thread Emmanuel Dreyfus
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 04:40:25PM +, Taylor R Campbell wrote: How about the attached patch? I've been sitting on this for months. Both changes seem fine, but the board does not behave as told by Linux crowd. At 0xe6 is a nul value where we should have 0x22, and attemps to change it does

Re: RFC: IRQ affinity (aka interrupt routing)

2014-08-27 Thread Kengo NAKAHARA
Hi, (2014/08/27 15:50), Matt Thomas wrote: On Aug 26, 2014, at 11:16 PM, Kengo NAKAHARA k-nakah...@iij.ad.jp wrote: It seems good, except return value. IRQ affinity may fail (e.g. when all cpus are set nointr flag), so return value should not be void. then we should have a