[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201026191107.GA407524@fuller.cnet>
Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2020 16:11:07 -0300
From: Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@...hat.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: Nitesh Narayan Lal <nitesh@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, helgaas@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-pci@...r.kernel.org, intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org,
frederic@...nel.org, sassmann@...hat.com,
jesse.brandeburg@...el.com, lihong.yang@...el.com,
jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com, jacob.e.keller@...el.com,
jlelli@...hat.com, hch@...radead.org, bhelgaas@...gle.com,
mike.marciniszyn@...el.com, dennis.dalessandro@...el.com,
thomas.lendacky@....com, jiri@...dia.com, mingo@...hat.com,
juri.lelli@...hat.com, vincent.guittot@...aro.org,
lgoncalv@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 4/4] PCI: Limit pci_alloc_irq_vectors() to
housekeeping CPUs
On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 08:00:39PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 26 2020 at 14:30, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 11:00:52PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> >> So without information from the driver which tells what the best number
> >> of interrupts is with a reduced number of CPUs, this cutoff will cause
> >> more problems than it solves. Regressions guaranteed.
> >
> > One might want to move from one interrupt per isolated app core
> > to zero, or vice versa. It seems that "best number of interrupts
> > is with reduced number of CPUs" information, is therefore in userspace,
> > not in driver...
>
> How does userspace know about the driver internals? Number of management
> interrupts, optimal number of interrupts per queue?
>
> >> Managed interrupts base their interrupt allocation and spreading on
> >> information which is handed in by the individual driver and not on crude
> >> assumptions. They are not imposing restrictions on the use case.
> >>
> >> It's perfectly fine for isolated work to save a data set to disk after
> >> computation has finished and that just works with the per-cpu I/O queue
> >> which is otherwise completely silent.
> >
> > Userspace could only change the mask of interrupts which are not
> > triggered by requests from the local CPU (admin, error, mgmt, etc),
> > to avoid the vector exhaustion problem.
> >
> > However, there is no explicit way for userspace to know that, as far as
> > i know.
> >
> > 130: 34845 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 IR-PCI-MSI 33554433-edge nvme0q1
> > 131: 0 27062 0 0 0 0 0 0 IR-PCI-MSI 33554434-edge nvme0q2
> > 132: 0 0 24393 0 0 0 0 0 IR-PCI-MSI 33554435-edge nvme0q3
> > 133: 0 0 0 24313 0 0 0 0 IR-PCI-MSI 33554436-edge nvme0q4
> > 134: 0 0 0 0 20608 0 0 0 IR-PCI-MSI 33554437-edge nvme0q5
> > 135: 0 0 0 0 0 22163 0 0 IR-PCI-MSI 33554438-edge nvme0q6
> > 136: 0 0 0 0 0 0 23020 0 IR-PCI-MSI 33554439-edge nvme0q7
> > 137: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24285 IR-PCI-MSI 33554440-edge nvme0q8
> >
> > Can that be retrieved from PCI-MSI information, or drivers
> > have to inform this?
>
> The driver should use a different name for the admin queues.
Works for me.
Sounds more like a heuristic which can break, so documenting this
as an "interface" seems appropriate.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists