On Sun, 20 May 2007 15:47:04 +0200
Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And how exactly is this related to clock events ?
Maybe, side-effects.
I will re-analyze this problem.
Thanks.
Best Regards
Komuro
> On Sun, 2007-05-20 at 19:48 +0900, Komuro wrote:
> > The problem is CPU1
On Sun, 20 May 2007 15:47:04 +0200
Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And how exactly is this related to clock events ?
Maybe, side-effects.
I will re-analyze this problem.
Thanks.
Best Regards
Komuro
On Sun, 2007-05-20 at 19:48 +0900, Komuro wrote:
The problem is CPU1 receives
On Sun, 2007-05-20 at 19:48 +0900, Komuro wrote:
> The problem is CPU1 receives 38239 interrupt-16
> but CPU0 receives only 15 interrupt-16
> CPU0 should receive more interrupts.
>
>CPU0 CPU1
> 0: 85 0 IO-APIC-edge timer
> 1: 0
On Sun, 20 May 2007 09:09:16 +0200
Thomas Gleixner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Mr. Thomas Gleixner,
> > any idea to fix this problem?
>
> Which problem ?
The problem is CPU1 receives 38239 interrupt-16
but CPU0 receives only 15 interrupt-16
CPU0 should receive more interrupts.
On Sat, 19 May 2007 23:03:56 -0400
Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Do you mean userspace irqbalance daemon?
Yes. I mean userspace irqbalance daemon.
Best Regards
Komuro
> Komuro wrote:
> > [clockevents: i386 drivers patch] introduces
> > irqbalance-does-not-work-properly problem.
On Sun, 2007-05-20 at 11:14 +0900, Komuro wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
> [clockevents: i386 drivers patch] introduces
> irqbalance-does-not-work-properly problem.
it disables irq balancing for IRQ0, but this does not affect any other
interrupts. It is almost irrelevant as the PIT/HPET timer interrupt
On Sun, 2007-05-20 at 11:14 +0900, Komuro wrote:
Hi,
[clockevents: i386 drivers patch] introduces
irqbalance-does-not-work-properly problem.
it disables irq balancing for IRQ0, but this does not affect any other
interrupts. It is almost irrelevant as the PIT/HPET timer interrupt
(irq0)
On Sat, 19 May 2007 23:03:56 -0400
Jeff Garzik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Do you mean userspace irqbalance daemon?
Yes. I mean userspace irqbalance daemon.
Best Regards
Komuro
Komuro wrote:
[clockevents: i386 drivers patch] introduces
irqbalance-does-not-work-properly problem.
On Sun, 20 May 2007 09:09:16 +0200
Thomas Gleixner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mr. Thomas Gleixner,
any idea to fix this problem?
Which problem ?
The problem is CPU1 receives 38239 interrupt-16
but CPU0 receives only 15 interrupt-16
CPU0 should receive more interrupts.
CPU0
On Sun, 2007-05-20 at 19:48 +0900, Komuro wrote:
The problem is CPU1 receives 38239 interrupt-16
but CPU0 receives only 15 interrupt-16
CPU0 should receive more interrupts.
CPU0 CPU1
0: 85 0 IO-APIC-edge timer
1: 0698
Komuro wrote:
[clockevents: i386 drivers patch] introduces
irqbalance-does-not-work-properly problem.
(The irq is not distributed to two Core
,most of the irq is distributed to CPU1)
Mr. Thomas Gleixner,
any idea to fix this problem?
Do you mean userspace irqbalance daemon?
It
Komuro wrote:
[clockevents: i386 drivers patch] introduces
irqbalance-does-not-work-properly problem.
(The irq is not distributed to two Core
,most of the irq is distributed to CPU1)
Mr. Thomas Gleixner,
any idea to fix this problem?
Do you mean userspace irqbalance daemon?
It
12 matches
Mail list logo
