Re: [LAU] irqbalance

On 11/21/2015 12:09 PM, Hermann Meyer wrote:
>
>
> Am 21.11.2015 um 11:57 schrieb Jeremy Jongepier:
>> But doesn't that mean all IRQ requests are being handled by the first
>> CPU?
>
> I'm not a expert in this, but here, without irqbalance, interrupts get
> handled by all 4 CPU's, while the sound-card interrupt get handled only
> by CPU1, the USB1 get handled by CPU0, eth0 get handled by CPU3, . . .

Ah ok, so the IRQ requests are still being spread over all cores. If I
were to believe this answer on Serverfault though you should only
disable irqbalance if you're pinning applications or IRQ's to specific
cores:
http://serverfault.com/questions/513807/is-there-still-a-use-for-irqbalance-on-modern-hardware
And as far as I know this is not advisable to do in a desktop context
but usually applies to systems that are built for specific, single tasks.

Jeremy

_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-user mailing list
Linux-audio-user@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/listinfo/linux-audio-user