From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C2560C433F5 for ; Fri, 1 Oct 2021 04:26:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B69F61A40 for ; Fri, 1 Oct 2021 04:26:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S236282AbhJAE1y (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Oct 2021 00:27:54 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:56492 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232679AbhJAE1y (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Oct 2021 00:27:54 -0400 Received: from casper.infradead.org (casper.infradead.org [IPv6:2001:8b0:10b:1236::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 68CF1C06176A; Thu, 30 Sep 2021 21:26:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=casper.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=24jrab2AMnBJR4sZxClUsLnZ/JpBz5ErZJ2htaSG9zY=; b=OzHsgfjWfkdjvl3MY5vrI5LgyM 2wjXR/trg4l7/ZOEtBgUpNgUvQuqph6kQfyv8c/FTbSned5IsqPpNpAy1NTzY3itgF3tfKlyyM2sY BMxQvstQWfs68VQzO5b276dwKK5XASFyQttzsD+Ar0XdE3bmeocFPbrrvbUFxDnpbh31aGmy1u3+2 xi2ozN5m2Z2fBO09rDPLlFhKxJ+Cg3eMzbXd6EnVc3BFmsyggpOjVJjMmMjHSjOZNqFVmkUXyPU6E 978D98QDqRenm2rpNZ/ymfOc1yppKUSXoSUe9u46yQFT8Io9uEgIiKJPIXFgKsnECCTwoeA1yc+PM afKJ+9nA==; Received: from hch by casper.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1mWA6L-00DXtA-Sy; Fri, 01 Oct 2021 04:24:58 +0000 Date: Fri, 1 Oct 2021 05:24:49 +0100 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra , Thomas Gleixner , Christoph Hellwig , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Doug Ledford , Jason Gunthorpe , linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, Subbu Seetharaman , Ketan Mukadam , Jitendra Bhivare , "James E.J. Bottomley" , "Martin K. Petersen" , "Manoj N. Kumar" , "Matthew R. Ochs" , Uma Krishnan , Brian King , James Smart , Dick Kennedy , Kashyap Desai , Sumit Saxena , Shivasharan S , megaraidlinux.pdl@broadcom.com, Sathya Prakash , Sreekanth Reddy , Suganath Prabu Subramani , MPT-FusionLinux.pdl@broadcom.com Subject: Re: [RFC] Is lib/irq_poll still considered useful? Message-ID: References: <20210930103754.2128949-1-bigeasy@linutronix.de> <20210930105605.ofyayf3uwk75u25s@linutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210930105605.ofyayf3uwk75u25s@linutronix.de> X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by casper.infradead.org. See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 12:56:05PM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > Is there a reason for the remaining user of irq_poll to keep using it? At least for RDMA there are workloads where the latency difference matters. That's why we added both the irq_poll and workqueue mode to thew new CQ API a few years ago.