Re: 6-CURRENT unbelievably slow?

From: John Baldwin <jhb_at_FreeBSD.org>
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 11:05:43 -0500
On Tuesday 16 November 2004 02:39 am, Joe Marcus Clarke wrote:
> John Baldwin wrote:
> | On Thursday 11 November 2004 05:37 pm, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> |>On Thu, Nov 11, 2004 at 01:39:09PM +0100, Alexander_at_Leidinger.net wrote:
> |>>Zitat von Joe Marcus Clarke <marcus_at_freebsd.org>:
> |>>>I noticed the interrupt storm detection line in dmesg.  In previous
> |>>>builds, this worked, but it doesn't seem to be taking effect anymore.
> |>>
> |>>AFAIK the interrupt storm detection was removed (at least partially).
> |>
> |>s/removed/fixed so it doesn't give so many false positives/
> |>
> |>(at least partially) ;-)
> |>
> |>Talk to jhb..
> |
> | Please try this patch out and let me know if it does any better:
>
> Yes, this patch makes a world of difference.  The interrupt storm is
> still there, but the ata0 (irq 14) rate is down to 1480 per second, and
> the interrupt load is only ~2%.  Thanks.

Can you tweak it a bit and see if it works even better if you put an #if 0 
around the lines that read:

+                               if (count > hz) {
+                                       storming = 0;
+                                       count = 0;
+                               } else
+                                       count++;


-- 
John Baldwin <jhb_at_FreeBSD.org>  <><  http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/
"Power Users Use the Power to Serve"  =  http://www.FreeBSD.org
Received on Tue Nov 16 2004 - 15:28:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:22 UTC