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]
Date: Mon, 13 May 2024 09:33:27 +0200
From: Benjamin Meier <benjamin.meier70@...il.com>
To: hch@....de
Cc: kbusch@...nel.org, kbusch@...a.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org, ming.lei@...hat.com, tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] nvme-pci: allow unmanaged interrupts

 > From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
 >
 > So let them argue why.  I'd rather have a really, really, really
 > good argument for this crap, and I'd like to hear it from the horses
 > mouth.

I reached out to Keith to explore the possibility of manually defining
which cores handle NVMe interrupts.

The application which we develop and maintain (in the company I work)
has very high requirements regarding latency. We have some isolated cores
and we run our application on those.

Our system is using kernel 5.4 which unfortunately does not support
"isolcpus=managed_irq". Actually, we did not even know about that
option, because we are focussed on kernel 5.4. It solves part
of our problem, but being able to specify where exactly interrupts
are running is still superior in our opinion.

E.g. assume the number of house-keeping cores is small, because we
want to have full control over the system. In our case we have threads
of different priorities where some get an exclusive core. Some other threads
share a core (or a group of cores) with other threads. Now we are still
happy to assign some interrupts to some of the cores which we consider as
"medium-priority". Due to the small number of non-isolated cores, it can
be tricky to assign all interrupts to those without a performance-penalty.

Given these requirements, manually specifying interrupt/core assignments
would offer greater flexibility and control over system performance.
Moreover, the proposed code changes appear minimal and have no
impact on existing functionalities.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ