| To: | xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: XFS mkfs/mount options |
| From: | Mark <musicman529@xxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 17 Jun 2008 02:20:14 -0700 (PDT) |
| Domainkey-signature: | a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Message-ID; b=TKPCWKe7G5eLA4FX+T+cVUF3xeqvWWnh9/X0DvVld/ML49yuii7Ug139Knr37OrSErk8ksfXu9DdaUzjKH1aUrzzzMzbIIldwXqeDD5Rsd6mQAJB+KpXg4cHynhCp5r7ygAZn6H3brsBoto2Iyx6PWMfhxZinrlrTbKv+GegkyI=; |
| Reply-to: | MusicMan529@xxxxxxxxx |
| Sender: | xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
--- On Tue, 6/17/08, Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > For each of these kernel threads, only those on CPU #2
> are actually pulling notable load. Why is this?
>
> Because your disk interrupts are delivered to that CPU
> only.
Thank you! Tuning my IRQ delivery gave a noticeable speed-up.
--
Mark
"What better place to find oneself than
on the streets of one's home village?"
--Capt. Jean-Luc Picard, "Family"
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: XFS mkfs/mount options, Dave Chinner |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: XFS mkfs/mount options, Justin Piszcz |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: XFS mkfs/mount options, Dave Chinner |
| Next by Thread: | Re: XFS mkfs/mount options, Justin Piszcz |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |