linux-kernel - Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] block: strict rq

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]

Message-ID: <20110723014633.GA32507@infradead.org>
Date:	Fri, 22 Jul 2011 21:46:33 -0400
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To:	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Cc:	jaxboe@...ionio.com, Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Roland Dreier <roland@...estorage.com>,
	Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] block: strict rq_affinity

On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 01:59:39PM -0700, Dan Williams wrote:
> Some storage controllers benefit from completions always being steered
> to the strict requester cpu rather than the looser "per-socket" steering
> that blk_cpu_to_group() attempts by default.

Isn't this actually dependent on the cpu, and not the storage
controller?

--
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/