On Wednesday, October 21, 2015 11:29:17 AM Maxim Sobolev wrote:
> Yes, I do. However, please note that for some reason they are not using
> nearly as much CPU time as the other 4 for some reason.
>
> 11 root -92 - 0K 1104K WAIT 3 95.3H 28.96%
> intr{irq267: igb0:que}
> 11 root -92 - 0K 1104K WAIT 1 95.5H 24.41%
> intr{irq265: igb0:que}
> 11 root -92 - 0K 1104K CPU2 2 95.2H 23.73%
> intr{irq266: igb0:que}
> 11 root -92 - 0K 1104K WAIT 0 95.2H 23.05%
> intr{irq264: igb0:que}
> 11 root -92 - 0K 1104K WAIT 6 286:37 1.12%
> intr{irq271: igb1:que}
> 11 root -92 - 0K 1104K WAIT 7 278:05 1.12%
> intr{irq272: igb1:que}
> 11 root -92 - 0K 1104K WAIT 5 284:26 1.07%
> intr{irq270: igb1:que}
> 11 root -92 - 0K 1104K WAIT 4 290:41 0.98%
> intr{irq269: igb1:que}
>
> CPU 0: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.9% system, 24.9% interrupt, 74.2% idle
> CPU 1: 0.5% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 26.3% interrupt, 73.2% idle
> CPU 2: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 1.4% system, 25.4% interrupt, 73.2% idle
> CPU 3: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.5% system, 23.9% interrupt, 75.6% idle
> CPU 4: 0.9% user, 0.0% nice, 2.3% system, 2.3% interrupt, 94.4% idle
> CPU 5: 1.4% user, 0.0% nice, 4.2% system, 4.2% interrupt, 90.1% idle
> CPU 6: 1.4% user, 0.0% nice, 3.8% system, 1.4% interrupt, 93.4% idle
> CPU 7: 2.8% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 3.8% interrupt, 93.4% idle
>
> 34263 igb0:que 0
> 32308 igb0:que 1
> 35022 igb0:que 2
> 34593 igb0:que 3
> 14931 igb1:que 0
> 13059 igb1:que 1
> 12971 igb1:que 2
> 13032 igb1:que 3
>
> So I guess interrupts are routed correctly after all, but for some reason
> driver takes some 5 times less time to process it on cpus 4-7
> (per-interrupt). Weird.
Are the pps rates the same? It seems like the interrupt rates on igb0
are double those of igb1?
--
John Baldwin
_______________________________________________
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
