[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <fed4d1b1-6d55-b131-f0e1-ccb8262dea18@oracle.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2018 11:18:47 +0800
From: "jianchao.wang" <jianchao.w.wang@...cle.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc: axboe@...com, sagi@...mberg.me, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org, keith.busch@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] nvme-pci: assign separate irq vectors for adminq and
ioq0
Hi Christoph
Thanks for your kindly response and directive
On 03/01/2018 12:47 AM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Note that we originally allocates irqs this way, and Keith changed
> it a while ago for good reasons. So I'd really like to see good
> reasons for moving away from this, and some heuristics to figure
> out which way to use. E.g. if the device supports more irqs than
> I/O queues your scheme might always be fine.
maybe we could add a logic that when get enough irq vectors, assign
separate irq vector to adminq, otherwise sharing.
Sincerely
Jianchao
Powered by blists - more mailing lists