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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.8 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABFA4C04ABB for ; Tue, 11 Sep 2018 09:54:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A399204FD for ; Tue, 11 Sep 2018 09:54:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=broadcom.com header.i=@broadcom.com header.b="Wme4xofE" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 4A399204FD Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=broadcom.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726786AbeIKOw6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Sep 2018 10:52:58 -0400 Received: from mail-it0-f47.google.com ([209.85.214.47]:39242 "EHLO mail-it0-f47.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726554AbeIKOw6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Sep 2018 10:52:58 -0400 Received: by mail-it0-f47.google.com with SMTP id h1-v6so658752itj.4 for ; Tue, 11 Sep 2018 02:54:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=broadcom.com; s=google; h=from:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:thread-index:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=u5BkxY+oRfyXUFoEOZvXJG0D6J+f+qv4P4sIMVkrFC8=; b=Wme4xofEa5BxfKaKeDVwXdnat3J4vZxTk0kjDX+yWX9s4rjJdvbT8SdbAFh65KdE2A zb8fMZH3hrI6gi7XSSmczqPCi4dRZ//Ir4ax0t8DPOsJZwM80mo/rkmxQX8oDKLL1UjX H27AT+hXpD+hCElM9e2s8Zh4NMchVLQmrghTA= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:references:in-reply-to:mime-version :thread-index:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=u5BkxY+oRfyXUFoEOZvXJG0D6J+f+qv4P4sIMVkrFC8=; b=PDoRjBY/0VOTZZgeyiPZOTcriNpDs3663h0CZidcapXmZE1e3NbbyVAr8UabZFf9p0 JoE0aBfBXAyHkHTpIic737NRf3GS4DeuR627nLoUiEWYa5LpHavzKmY3Nd6wUb8V+Bjc kv/Cop5QJV+2FBk+dasy0l2MT34QSg0I4BAPfO6+gue+cmoyxykZ4epmbyMRjeMwS/37 VTPUyY+igifJcJhHEEqLZMqfZ9klBGfyKcmxGOUEeY8OMWGGBrcSjDe+6uZPSHZhWKBA S8qFkBnYCTOufZQrCrcfT2P4bekqCPc9Woj58Mxcy7kf0Mj3o5EVWMHvQ0LoQR68YYE+ LOkQ== X-Gm-Message-State: APzg51C0ZcP32+Bvhi7Us1jUba/f+5UU3Cu1teuOM51g3L8u8BPaCdfr VkH+KGjKjvysWEwu8ngpGWUmqzJu4dTra1gJkp/WDg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0VdYuQDJAlVf2qWPyfet61a3rlCmFh8EdLyRTxaiFw393Py8tF/2VROSRUWMw1ep3KkRkTSYaXSPHsVhKPPy9Jt8= X-Received: by 2002:a24:eec7:: with SMTP id b190-v6mr704322iti.32.1536659664379; Tue, 11 Sep 2018 02:54:24 -0700 (PDT) From: Kashyap Desai References: <20180829084618.GA24765@ming.t460p> <300d6fef733ca76ced581f8c6304bac6@mail.gmail.com> <20180911092126.GA10330@lst.de> In-Reply-To: <20180911092126.GA10330@lst.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: AQL9fTS7902n0VSYivL2AMCzXDd9xwGQx87UAiSubfsBEAZEn6JyQukA Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2018 15:24:22 +0530 Message-ID: <0b542db5145d878ef1b839387445987d@mail.gmail.com> Subject: RE: Affinity managed interrupts vs non-managed interrupts To: Christoph Hellwig , Sumit Saxena Cc: Ming Lei , tglx@linutronix.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Shivasharan Srikanteshwara Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > The point I don't get here is why you need separate reply queues for > the interrupt coalesce setting. Shouldn't this just be a flag at > submission time that indicates the amount of coalescing that should > happen? > > What is the benefit of having different completion queues? Having different set of queues (it will is something like N:16 where N queues are without interrupt coalescing and 16 dedicated queues for interrupt coalescing) we want to avoid penalty introduced by interrupt coalescing especially for lower QD profiles. Kashyap