linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Add support for multiple MSI on x86

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 9 Mar 2011 18:05:26 -0800
From:	Roland Dreier <roland@...estorage.com>
To:	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Cc:	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Micha Nelissen <micha@...i.hopto.org>,
	Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@...tuousgeek.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, x86@...nel.org,
	"Venkatesh Pallipadi (Venki)" <venki@...gle.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
	Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add support for multiple MSI on x86

> Yes, but there are MSI devices in the field...

But do any of them benefit from having multiple interrupt vectors available?

If I recall correct, willy was motivated by AHCI performance to try this out,
and in the end things didn't go any faster using multiple MSI.

The big win with multiple interrupt vectors is when you have independent
queues that you can point different CPUs at, and give each CPU its own
interrupt.  And that type of hardware is pretty certain to support MSI-X.

 - R.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/