From: | William Kenworthy <billk@×××××××××.au> |
---|---|
To: | "gentoo-user@l.g.o" <gentoo-user@l.g.o> |
Subject: | [gentoo-user] irqbalance |
Date: | Fri, 24 Sep 2021 12:35:29 |
Message-Id: | 5b618782-fb5b-b97c-e17b-6c7c0a32957d@iinet.net.au |
1 | |
2 | |
3 | |
4 | |
5 | |
6 | |
7 | In going down the NUMA rabbit hole, I discovered "irqbalance".�� |
8 | Does anyone have an opinion on its usefulness? It is in portage. |
9 | |
10 | On some multicore arm systems I am using irq affiity to steer |
11 | certain irq's to faster CPU's (network, usb) - but from what I |
12 | have been reading, irqbalance can improve a mixed workload but a |
13 | system with a small number of busy irq's is better served by |
14 | separating and locking them to different, more powerful |
15 | processors. e.g., arm big.LITTLE architectures. |
16 | BillK |
17 | |
18 | |
19 | |
20 | |
21 | |
22 |
Subject | Author |
---|---|
Re: [gentoo-user] irqbalance | Adam Carter <adamcarter3@×××××.com> |