[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <456bf9cf-87b8-4c3d-ac0c-7e392bcf26de@www.fastmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2021 21:31:34 -0700
From: "Andy Lutomirski" <luto@...nel.org>
To: "Sohil Mehta" <sohil.mehta@...el.com>,
"the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>
Cc: "Tony Luck" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
"Dave Hansen" <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...hat.com>, "Borislav Petkov" <bp@...en8.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>, "Jens Axboe" <axboe@...nel.dk>,
"Christian Brauner" <christian@...uner.io>,
"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"Shuah Khan" <shuah@...nel.org>, "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...db.de>,
"Jonathan Corbet" <corbet@....net>,
"Raj Ashok" <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
"Jacob Pan" <jacob.jun.pan@...ux.intel.com>,
"Gayatri Kammela" <gayatri.kammela@...el.com>,
"Zeng Guang" <guang.zeng@...el.com>,
"Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
"Randy E Witt" <randy.e.witt@...el.com>,
"Shankar, Ravi V" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
"Ramesh Thomas" <ramesh.thomas@...el.com>,
"Linux API" <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org,
"Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 00/13] x86 User Interrupts support
On Mon, Sep 13, 2021, at 1:01 PM, Sohil Mehta wrote:
> User Interrupts Introduction
> ============================
>
> User Interrupts (Uintr) is a hardware technology that enables delivering
> interrupts directly to user space.
>
> Today, virtually all communication across privilege boundaries happens by going
> through the kernel. These include signals, pipes, remote procedure calls and
> hardware interrupt based notifications. User interrupts provide the foundation
> for more efficient (low latency and low CPU utilization) versions of these
> common operations by avoiding transitions through the kernel.
>
...
I spent some time reviewing the docs (ISE) and contemplating how this all fits together, and I have a high level question:
Can someone give an example of a realistic workload that would benefit from SENDUIPI and precisely how it would use SENDUIPI? Or an example of a realistic workload that would benefit from hypothetical device-initiated user interrupts and how it would use them? I'm having trouble imagining something that wouldn't work as well or better by simply polling, at least on DMA-coherent architectures like x86.
(I can imagine some benefit to a hypothetical improved SENDUIPI with idential user semantics but that supported a proper interaction with the scheduler and blocking syscalls. But that's not what's documented in the ISE...)
--Andy
Powered by blists - more mailing lists