[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160616151950.GA11840@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2016 11:19:51 -0400
From: Keith Busch <keith.busch@...el.com>
To: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@...disk.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"axboe@...com" <axboe@...com>,
"linux-block@...r.kernel.org" <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-pci@...r.kernel.org" <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org" <linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/13] irq: Introduce IRQD_AFFINITY_MANAGED flag
On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 10:50:53PM +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote:
> Does it matter on x86 systems whether or not these interrupt vectors are
> also associated with a CPU with a higher CPU number? Although multiple bits
> can be set in /proc/irq/<n>/smp_affinity only the first bit counts on x86
> platforms. In default_cpu_mask_to_apicid_and() it is easy to see that only
> the first bit that has been set in that mask counts on x86 systems.
Wow, thanks for the information. I didn't know the apic wasn't using
the full cpu mask, so this changes how I need to look at this, and will
experiment with such a configuration.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists