MOLNAR Ingo wrote:
>
> On Thu, 17 Dec 1998, Doug Ledford wrote:
>
> > Just so you know though, it isn't a problem in real practice:
> > 8: 1 + rtc
> > 9: 483377 aic7xxx, aic7xxx, aic7xxx, aic7xxx, aic7xxx, aic7xxx,
> > aic7xxx, Intel EtherExpress Pro 10/100 Ethernet
> > 10: 18581 scb0
> >
> > That's seven aic7xxx busses on one interrupt under 2.0.36 and they only
> > marginally spread out better with the IO-APIC code in 2.1.131
>
> The IO-APIC code cannot 'spread out' interrupts. It can take advantage of
> a better pin-connection to the IO-APIC, but thats hardcoded in most cases.
> But the IO-APIC can spread out interrupts between CPUs.
Yes, I'm aware of the fact that with the IO-APIC in use that it doesn't
change the interrupt routing. It does, however, allow us to use the
real routing instead of the mapped routing. In this case, the BIOS maps
three different IO-APIC pins to interrupt 9, so under 2.1.x with the
IO-APIC code in use, we see these devices on three different high
interrupts instead of all on IRQ 9. Hence, the use of the phrase
"spread out" the interrupts even if it isn't the IO-APIC code that
spreads them out, you still see the results when you use it :)
--
Doug Ledford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Opinions expressed are my own, but
they should be everybody's.
-
Linux SMP list: FIRST see FAQ at http://www.irisa.fr/prive/mentre/smp-faq/
To Unsubscribe: send "unsubscribe linux-smp" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
