[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20151012160948.GD20210@thunk.org>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2015 12:09:48 -0400
From: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: ksummit-discuss@...ts.linuxfoundation.org,
linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [TECH TOPIC] IRQ affinity
Hi Christoph,
Do you think this is still an issue that would be worth discsussing at
the kernel summit as a technical topic? If so, would you be willing
to be responsible for kicking off the discussion for this topic?
Thanks,
- Ted
On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 05:07:08AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Many years ago we decided to move setting of IRQ to core affnities to
> userspace with the irqbalance daemon.
>
> These days we have systems with lots of MSI-X vector, and we have
> hardware and subsystem support for per-CPU I/O queues in the block
> layer, the RDMA subsystem and probably the network stack (I'm not too
> familar with the recent developments there). It would really help the
> out of the box performance and experience if we could allow such
> subsystems to bind interrupt vectors to the node that the queue is
> configured on.
>
> I'd like to discuss if the rationale for moving the IRQ affinity setting
> fully to userspace are still correct in todays world any any pitfalls
> we'll have to learn from in irqbalanced and the old in-kernel affinity
> code.
> _______________________________________________
> Ksummit-discuss mailing list
> Ksummit-discuss@...ts.linuxfoundation.org
> https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ksummit-discuss
--
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists