[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20211129233133.GA4670@nvidia.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2021 19:31:33 -0400
From: Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>
To: Logan Gunthorpe <logang@...tatee.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>,
Marc Zygnier <maz@...nel.org>,
Alex Williamson <alex.williamson@...hat.com>,
Kevin Tian <kevin.tian@...el.com>,
Megha Dey <megha.dey@...el.com>,
Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>, linux-pci@...r.kernel.org,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Jon Mason <jdmason@...zu.us>,
Dave Jiang <dave.jiang@...el.com>,
Allen Hubbe <allenbh@...il.com>, linux-ntb@...glegroups.com,
linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, Heiko Carstens <hca@...ux.ibm.com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 21/32] NTB/msi: Convert to msi_on_each_desc()
On Mon, Nov 29, 2021 at 03:27:20PM -0700, Logan Gunthorpe wrote:
> In most cases, the NTB code needs more interrupts than the hardware
> actually provides for in its MSI-X table. That's what PCI_IRQ_VIRTUAL is
> for: it allows the driver to request more interrupts than the hardware
> advertises (ie. pci_msix_vec_count()). These extra interrupts are
> created, but get flagged with msi_attrib.is_virtual which ensures
> functions that program the MSI-X table don't try to write past the end
> of the hardware's table.
AFAICT what you've described is what Intel is calling IMS in other
contexts.
IMS is fundamentally a way to control MSI interrupt descriptors that
are not accessed through PCI SIG compliant means. In this case the NTB
driver has to do its magic to relay the addr/data pairs to the real
MSI storage in the hidden devices.
PCI_IRQ_VIRTUAL should probably be fully replaced by the new dynamic
APIs in the fullness of time..
> Existing NTB hardware does already have what's called a doorbell which
> provides the same functionally as the above technique. However, existing
> hardware implementations of doorbells have significant latency and thus
> slow down performance substantially. Implementing the MSI interrupts as
> described above increased the performance of ntb_transport by more than
> three times[1].
Does the doorbell scheme allow as many interrupts?
Jason
Powered by blists - more mailing lists