From: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@sandisk.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org" <linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org>,
"axboe@fb.com" <axboe@fb.com>,
"tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/13] irq: Introduce IRQD_AFFINITY_MANAGED flag
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2016 12:42:53 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <67ef7a1c-56e1-db2c-b038-f9784fc1f52f@sandisk.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160615102311.GA16619@lst.de>
On 06/15/2016 12:23 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Hi Bart,
>
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 10:44:37AM +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>> However, is excluding these interrupts from irqbalanced really the
>> way to go?
>
> What positive effect will irqbalanced have on explcititly spread
> interrupts?
>
>> Suppose e.g. that a system is equipped with two RDMA adapters,
>> that these adapters are used by a blk-mq enabled block initiator driver and
>> that each adapter supports eight MSI-X vectors. Should the interrupts of
>> the two RDMA adapters be assigned to different CPU cores? If so, which
>> software layer should realize this? The kernel or user space?
>
> RDMA should eventually use the interrupt spreading implemented in this
> series, as should networking (RDMA actually is on my near term todo list).
>
> RDMA block protocols will then pick up the queue information from the
> HCA driver. I've not actually implemented this yet, but my current idea
> is:
>
> - the HCA drivers are switch to use pci_alloc_irq_vectors to spread
> their interrupt vectors around the system
> - the HCA drivers will expose the irq_affinity affinity array
> in struct ib_device (we'll need to consider what do about the
> odd completion vectors instead of irq terminology in the RDMA stack,
> but that's not a show stopper)
> - multiqueue aware block drivers will then feed the irq_affinity
> cpumask from the hca driver to blk-mq. We'll also need to ensure
> the number of protocol queues aligns nicely to the number of hardware
> queues. My current thinking is that they should be the same or
> a fraction of the hardware completion queues, but this might need
> some careful benchmarking.
Hello Christoph,
Today irqbalanced is responsible for deciding how to assign interrupts
from different adapters to CPU cores. Does the above mean that for
adapters that support multiple MSI-X interrupts the kernel will have
full responsibility for assigning interrupt vectors to CPU cores?
If two identical adapters are present in a system, will these generate
the same irq_affinity mask? Do you agree that interrupt vectors from
different adapters should be assigned to different CPU cores if enough
CPU cores are available? If so, which software layer will assign
interrupt vectors from different adapters to different CPU cores?
Thanks,
Bart.
_______________________________________________
Linux-nvme mailing list
Linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-nvme
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@sandisk.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: "tglx@linutronix.de" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"axboe@fb.com" <axboe@fb.com>,
"linux-block@vger.kernel.org" <linux-block@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-pci@vger.kernel.org" <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org" <linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/13] irq: Introduce IRQD_AFFINITY_MANAGED flag
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2016 12:42:53 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <67ef7a1c-56e1-db2c-b038-f9784fc1f52f@sandisk.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160615102311.GA16619@lst.de>
On 06/15/2016 12:23 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Hi Bart,
>
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 10:44:37AM +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>> However, is excluding these interrupts from irqbalanced really the
>> way to go?
>
> What positive effect will irqbalanced have on explcititly spread
> interrupts?
>
>> Suppose e.g. that a system is equipped with two RDMA adapters,
>> that these adapters are used by a blk-mq enabled block initiator driver and
>> that each adapter supports eight MSI-X vectors. Should the interrupts of
>> the two RDMA adapters be assigned to different CPU cores? If so, which
>> software layer should realize this? The kernel or user space?
>
> RDMA should eventually use the interrupt spreading implemented in this
> series, as should networking (RDMA actually is on my near term todo list).
>
> RDMA block protocols will then pick up the queue information from the
> HCA driver. I've not actually implemented this yet, but my current idea
> is:
>
> - the HCA drivers are switch to use pci_alloc_irq_vectors to spread
> their interrupt vectors around the system
> - the HCA drivers will expose the irq_affinity affinity array
> in struct ib_device (we'll need to consider what do about the
> odd completion vectors instead of irq terminology in the RDMA stack,
> but that's not a show stopper)
> - multiqueue aware block drivers will then feed the irq_affinity
> cpumask from the hca driver to blk-mq. We'll also need to ensure
> the number of protocol queues aligns nicely to the number of hardware
> queues. My current thinking is that they should be the same or
> a fraction of the hardware completion queues, but this might need
> some careful benchmarking.
Hello Christoph,
Today irqbalanced is responsible for deciding how to assign interrupts
from different adapters to CPU cores. Does the above mean that for
adapters that support multiple MSI-X interrupts the kernel will have
full responsibility for assigning interrupt vectors to CPU cores?
If two identical adapters are present in a system, will these generate
the same irq_affinity mask? Do you agree that interrupt vectors from
different adapters should be assigned to different CPU cores if enough
CPU cores are available? If so, which software layer will assign
interrupt vectors from different adapters to different CPU cores?
Thanks,
Bart.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: bart.vanassche@sandisk.com (Bart Van Assche)
Subject: [PATCH 02/13] irq: Introduce IRQD_AFFINITY_MANAGED flag
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2016 12:42:53 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <67ef7a1c-56e1-db2c-b038-f9784fc1f52f@sandisk.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160615102311.GA16619@lst.de>
On 06/15/2016 12:23 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Hi Bart,
>
> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016@10:44:37AM +0200, Bart Van Assche wrote:
>> However, is excluding these interrupts from irqbalanced really the
>> way to go?
>
> What positive effect will irqbalanced have on explcititly spread
> interrupts?
>
>> Suppose e.g. that a system is equipped with two RDMA adapters,
>> that these adapters are used by a blk-mq enabled block initiator driver and
>> that each adapter supports eight MSI-X vectors. Should the interrupts of
>> the two RDMA adapters be assigned to different CPU cores? If so, which
>> software layer should realize this? The kernel or user space?
>
> RDMA should eventually use the interrupt spreading implemented in this
> series, as should networking (RDMA actually is on my near term todo list).
>
> RDMA block protocols will then pick up the queue information from the
> HCA driver. I've not actually implemented this yet, but my current idea
> is:
>
> - the HCA drivers are switch to use pci_alloc_irq_vectors to spread
> their interrupt vectors around the system
> - the HCA drivers will expose the irq_affinity affinity array
> in struct ib_device (we'll need to consider what do about the
> odd completion vectors instead of irq terminology in the RDMA stack,
> but that's not a show stopper)
> - multiqueue aware block drivers will then feed the irq_affinity
> cpumask from the hca driver to blk-mq. We'll also need to ensure
> the number of protocol queues aligns nicely to the number of hardware
> queues. My current thinking is that they should be the same or
> a fraction of the hardware completion queues, but this might need
> some careful benchmarking.
Hello Christoph,
Today irqbalanced is responsible for deciding how to assign interrupts
from different adapters to CPU cores. Does the above mean that for
adapters that support multiple MSI-X interrupts the kernel will have
full responsibility for assigning interrupt vectors to CPU cores?
If two identical adapters are present in a system, will these generate
the same irq_affinity mask? Do you agree that interrupt vectors from
different adapters should be assigned to different CPU cores if enough
CPU cores are available? If so, which software layer will assign
interrupt vectors from different adapters to different CPU cores?
Thanks,
Bart.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-06-15 10:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 132+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-06-14 19:58 automatic interrupt affinity for MSI/MSI-X capable devices V2 Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-14 19:58 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-14 19:58 ` [PATCH 01/13] irq/msi: Remove unused MSI_FLAG_IDENTITY_MAP Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-14 19:58 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-14 19:58 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-16 9:05 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-06-16 9:05 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-06-14 19:58 ` [PATCH 02/13] irq: Introduce IRQD_AFFINITY_MANAGED flag Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-14 19:58 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-14 19:58 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-15 8:44 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-06-15 8:44 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-06-15 10:23 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-15 10:23 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-15 10:42 ` Bart Van Assche [this message]
2016-06-15 10:42 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-06-15 10:42 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-06-15 15:14 ` Keith Busch
2016-06-15 15:14 ` Keith Busch
2016-06-15 15:28 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-06-15 15:28 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-06-15 16:03 ` Keith Busch
2016-06-15 16:03 ` Keith Busch
2016-06-15 19:36 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-06-15 19:36 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-06-15 20:06 ` Keith Busch
2016-06-15 20:06 ` Keith Busch
2016-06-15 20:12 ` Keith Busch
2016-06-15 20:12 ` Keith Busch
2016-06-15 20:50 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-06-15 20:50 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-06-16 15:19 ` Keith Busch
2016-06-16 15:19 ` Keith Busch
2016-06-22 11:56 ` Alexander Gordeev
2016-06-22 11:56 ` Alexander Gordeev
2016-06-22 11:56 ` Alexander Gordeev
2016-06-16 15:20 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-16 15:20 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-16 15:39 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-06-16 15:39 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-06-20 12:22 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-20 12:22 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-20 12:22 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-20 13:21 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-06-20 13:21 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-06-20 13:21 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-06-21 14:31 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-21 14:31 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-21 14:31 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-16 9:08 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-06-16 9:08 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-06-14 19:58 ` [PATCH 03/13] irq: Add affinity hint to irq allocation Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-14 19:58 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-14 19:58 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-14 19:58 ` [PATCH 04/13] irq: Use affinity hint in irqdesc allocation Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-14 19:58 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-14 19:58 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-14 19:58 ` [PATCH 05/13] irq/msi: Make use of affinity aware allocations Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-14 19:58 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-14 19:58 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-14 19:58 ` [PATCH 06/13] irq: add a helper spread an affinity mask for MSI/MSI-X vectors Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-14 19:58 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-14 19:58 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-14 21:54 ` Guilherme G. Piccoli
2016-06-14 21:54 ` Guilherme G. Piccoli
2016-06-15 8:35 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-06-15 8:35 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-06-15 8:35 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-06-15 10:10 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-15 10:10 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-15 13:09 ` Guilherme G. Piccoli
2016-06-15 13:09 ` Guilherme G. Piccoli
2016-06-16 15:16 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-16 15:16 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-25 20:05 ` Alexander Gordeev
2016-06-25 20:05 ` Alexander Gordeev
2016-06-30 17:48 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-30 17:48 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-30 17:48 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-07-01 7:25 ` Alexander Gordeev
2016-07-01 7:25 ` Alexander Gordeev
2016-06-14 19:59 ` [PATCH 07/13] pci: Provide sensible irq vector alloc/free routines Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-14 19:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-14 19:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-23 11:16 ` Alexander Gordeev
2016-06-23 11:16 ` Alexander Gordeev
2016-06-30 16:54 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-30 16:54 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-30 17:28 ` Alexander Gordeev
2016-06-30 17:28 ` Alexander Gordeev
2016-06-30 17:35 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-30 17:35 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-14 19:59 ` [PATCH 08/13] pci: spread interrupt vectors in pci_alloc_irq_vectors Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-14 19:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-14 19:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-25 20:22 ` Alexander Gordeev
2016-06-25 20:22 ` Alexander Gordeev
2016-06-14 19:59 ` [PATCH 09/13] blk-mq: don't redistribute hardware queues on a CPU hotplug event Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-14 19:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-14 19:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-14 19:59 ` [PATCH 10/13] blk-mq: only allocate a single mq_map per tag_set Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-14 19:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-14 19:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-14 19:59 ` [PATCH 11/13] blk-mq: allow the driver to pass in an affinity mask Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-14 19:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-14 19:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-07-04 8:15 ` Alexander Gordeev
2016-07-04 8:15 ` Alexander Gordeev
2016-07-04 8:38 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-07-04 8:38 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-07-04 9:35 ` Alexander Gordeev
2016-07-04 9:35 ` Alexander Gordeev
2016-07-10 3:41 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-07-10 3:41 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-07-12 6:42 ` Alexander Gordeev
2016-07-12 6:42 ` Alexander Gordeev
2016-06-14 19:59 ` [PATCH 12/13] nvme: switch to use pci_alloc_irq_vectors Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-14 19:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-14 19:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-14 19:59 ` [PATCH 13/13] nvme: remove the post_scan callout Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-14 19:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-14 19:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-16 9:45 ` automatic interrupt affinity for MSI/MSI-X capable devices V2 Bart Van Assche
2016-06-16 9:45 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-06-16 9:45 ` Bart Van Assche
2016-06-16 15:22 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-16 15:22 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-06-26 19:40 ` Alexander Gordeev
2016-06-26 19:40 ` Alexander Gordeev
2016-07-04 8:39 automatic interrupt affinity for MSI/MSI-X capable devices V3 Christoph Hellwig
2016-07-04 8:39 ` [PATCH 02/13] irq: Introduce IRQD_AFFINITY_MANAGED flag Christoph Hellwig
2016-07-04 8:39 ` Christoph Hellwig
2016-07-04 8:39 ` Christoph Hellwig
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=67ef7a1c-56e1-db2c-b038-f9784fc1f52f@sandisk.com \
--to=bart.vanassche@sandisk.com \
--cc=axboe@fb.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.