[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAN+hb0X4UWmDvA0=5gpC6+Qt7vDgz0u5B79CM4KqQ-yuJmAO7Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2017 13:38:48 -0800
From: Benjamin Serebrin <serebrin@...gle.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Cc: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>,
Venkatesh Srinivas <venkateshs@...gle.com>,
"Jon Olson (Google Drive)" <jonolson@...gle.com>,
Rick Jones <rick.jones2@....com>,
James Mattson <jmattson@...gle.com>,
linux-s390 <linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-arch@...r.kernel.org" <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next] virtio: Fix affinity for #VCPUs != #queue pairs
On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 11:17 AM, Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@...hat.com> wrote:
> Right. But userspace knows it's random at least. If kernel supplies
> affinity e.g. the way your patch does, userspace ATM accepts this as a
> gospel.
The existing code supplies the same affinity gospels in the #vcpu ==
#queue case today.
And the patch (unless it has a bug in it) should not affect the #vcpu
== #queue case's
behavior. I don't quite understand what property we'd be changing
with the patch.
Here's the same dump of smp_affinity_list, on a 16 VCPU machine with
unmodified kernel:
0
0
1
1
2
2
[..]
15
15
And xps_cpus
00000001
00000002
[...]
00008000
This patch causes #vcpu != #queue case to follow the same pattern.
Thanks again!
Ben
Powered by blists - more mailing lists