[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201031104108.wjjdiklqrgyqmj54@linutronix.de>
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2020 11:41:08 +0100
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To: Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
David Runge <dave@...epmap.de>, linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org,
Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Daniel Wagner <dwagner@...e.de>, Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] blk-mq: Use llist_head for blk_cpu_done
On 2020-10-29 14:07:59 [-0700], Sagi Grimberg wrote:
> > in which context?
>
> Not sure what is the question.
The question is in which context do you complete your requests. My guess
by now is "usually softirq/NAPI and context in rare error case".
> > But this is probably nr_hw_queues > 1?
>
> Yes.
So this means it will either complete directly or issue an IPI.
> > but running it in softirq on the remote CPU would still allow of other
> > packets to come on the remote CPU (which would block BLOCK sofirq if
> > NET_RX is already running).
>
> Not sure I understand your comment, if napi triggers on core X and we
> complete from that, it will trigger IPI to core Y, and there with patch #2
> is will trigger softirq instead of calling ->complete directly no?
This is correct. But trigger softirq does not mean that it will wake
`ksoftirqd' as it is the case for the usb-storage right now. In your
case (completing from NAPI/sofitrq (or for most other driver which
complete in their IRQ handler)) it means:
- trigger IPI
- IPI will OR the BLOCK-softirq bit.
- on exit from IPI it will invoke do_softirq() (unless softirq is
already pending and got interrupted by the IPI) and complete the
Block request.
Sebastian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists