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: <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

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ