On Thu, 18 Oct 2007 15:57:16 -0600 Scott Long wrote: > Boris Samorodov wrote:
> > Since nobody answered so far, here is my two cents. I'm not an expert > > here so it's only my imho. > > > > On Wed, 17 Oct 2007 22:52:49 +0400 Alexey Popov wrote: > > > >> interrupt total rate > >> irq6: fdc0 8 0 > >> irq14: ata0 47 0 > >> irq16: uhci0 1428187319 1851 > > ^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^ [1] > >> irq18: uhci2 12374352 16 > >> irq23: ehci0 3 0 > >> irq46: amr0 11983237 15 > >> irq64: em0 1427141755 1850 > > ^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^ [2] > >> cpu0: timer 1540896452 1997 > >> cpu1: timer 1542377798 1999 > >> Total 5962960971 7730 > > > > [1] and [2] looks suspicious to me (totals and rate are too close to > > each other and btw to timers). Let the latter (timers) alone. Do you > > use any USB device? Can you try to use other network card? That > > behaviour seems to be an interrupt storm and/or irq collision. > It's neither. It's a side effect of a feature that FreeBSD abuses for > handling interrupts. Note that amr0 and ehci2 are acting similar. It's > mostly harmless, but it does waste CPU cycles. I wouldn't expect this > on a recent version of FreeBSD, though, at least not from the e1000 > driver. I see. Sorry for the noise. So, as I can understand _that_ can't be the problem (as at subj) the OP is seeing? WBR -- bsam _______________________________________________ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
