CentOS - Aug 2013 - back to: kernel: do_IRQ: 2.96 No irq handler for vector (irq -1)

I asked here a week or so ago, and referenced an older bug, but haven't
seen any comments. Googling, I see others asking about the same. Datum:
*every* one I've found is like this: they're all HP DL580's or
DL380's, or
such.

This is being used for heavy-duty scientific computing. Does anyone know
if it *will* it seriously affect throughput speed if I turn off
irqbalance?

It's running 6.4, btw.

        mark

----- Original Message -----
| I asked here a week or so ago, and referenced an older bug, but
| haven't
| seen any comments. Googling, I see others asking about the same.
| Datum:
| *every* one I've found is like this: they're all HP DL580's or
| DL380's, or
| such.
| 
| This is being used for heavy-duty scientific computing. Does anyone
| know
| if it *will* it seriously affect throughput speed if I turn off
| irqbalance?
| 
| It's running 6.4, btw.
| 
|         mark

That really depends on the type of computing.  If it's memory or CPU
intensive computing it should have little to no affect. However, if you are
doing heavy I/O intensive operations, more specifically network intensive, then
yes, disabling irqbalance will have a fairly significant affect on performance
for those operations.

-- 
James A. Peltier
Manager, IT Services - Research Computing Group
Simon Fraser University - Burnaby Campus
Phone   : 778-782-6573
Fax     : 778-782-3045
E-Mail  : jpeltier at sfu.ca
Website : http://www.sfu.ca/itservices

?A successful person is one who can lay a solid foundation from the bricks
others have thrown at them.? -David Brinkley via Luke Shaw

On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 7:32 AM,  <m.roth at 5-cent.us>
wrote:
> I asked here a week or so ago, and referenced an older bug, but haven't
> seen any comments. Googling, I see others asking about the same. Datum:
> *every* one I've found is like this: they're all HP DL580's or
DL380's, or
> such.
>
> This is being used for heavy-duty scientific computing. Does anyone know
> if it *will* it seriously affect throughput speed if I turn off
> irqbalance?
>
> It's running 6.4, btw.
>
>         mark
You referred to http://bugs.centos.org/view.php?id=6319 in your
earlier post. If you believe you are hit by the bug reported there, I
strongly urge you to test the centosplus kernel that has a patch (see
note 17700 of the bug report).

Regarding the current status, upstream BZ (
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=887006 ) is open to the
public. It is "on QA" at the moment. I suspect the fix will be in
EL6.5 and possibly in a 6.4 kernel update.

Akemi