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
| ||
|
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 14:23:52 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de> To: Sagi Grimberg <sagig@....mellanox.co.il> Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@...disk.com>, "linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>, "axboe@...com" <axboe@...com>, "linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/9] IB: add a proper completion queue abstraction On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 12:36:00PM +0200, Sagi Grimberg wrote: > >> Wouldn't it be a better idea to set the WQ_SYSFS interface and use >> the standard sysfs interface for specifying cpumasks or node affinity? > > I think that bart wants to allow the caller to select cpu affinity > per CQ. In this case ib_alloc_cq in workqueue mode would need to > accept a affinity_hint from the caller (default to wild-card > WORK_CPU_UNBOUND). Hmm, true. How would be set that hint from userspace? I'd really prefer to see a practical justification for it first. -- 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