From: "jianchao.wang" <jianchao.w.wang@oracle.com>
To: Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com>
Cc: axboe@fb.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, hch@lst.de,
linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, sagi@grimberg.me
Subject: Re: [PATCH] nvme-pci: assign separate irq vectors for adminq and ioq0
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2018 23:42:21 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8066e06c-90f4-c21b-e36f-89f6e8ca28c5@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180228152741.GA16002@localhost.localdomain>
Hi Keith
Thanks for your kindly response and directive
On 02/28/2018 11:27 PM, Keith Busch wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 10:53:31AM +0800, jianchao.wang wrote:
>> On 02/27/2018 11:13 PM, Keith Busch wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 04:46:17PM +0800, Jianchao Wang wrote:
>>>> Currently, adminq and ioq0 share the same irq vector. This is
>>>> unfair for both amdinq and ioq0.
>>>> - For adminq, its completion irq has to be bound on cpu0.
>>>> - For ioq0, when the irq fires for io completion, the adminq irq
>>>> action has to be checked also.
>>>
>>> This change log could use some improvements. Why is it bad if admin
>>> interrupts affinity is with cpu0?
>>
>> adminq interrupts should be able to fire everywhere.
>> do we have any reason to bound it on cpu0 ?
>
> Your patch will have the admin vector CPU affinity mask set to
> 0xff..ff. The first set bit for an online CPU is the one the IRQ handler
> will run on, so the admin queue will still only run on CPU 0.
hmmm...yes.
When I test there is only one irq vector, I get following result:
124: 0 0 253541 0 0 0 0 0 IR-PCI-MSI 1048576-edge nvme0q0, nvme0q1
>
>>> Are you able to measure _any_ performance difference on IO queue 1 vs IO
>>> queue 2 that you can attribute to IO queue 1's sharing vector 0?
>>
>> Actually, I didn't get any performance improving on my own NVMe card.
>> But it may be needed on some enterprise card, especially the media is persist memory.
>> nvme_irq will be invoked twice when ioq0 irq fires, this will introduce another unnecessary DMA
>> accessing on cq entry.
>
> A CPU reading its own memory isn't a DMA. It's just a cheap memory read.
Oh sorry, my bad, I mean it is operation on DMA address, it is uncached.
nvme_irq
-> nvme_process_cq
-> nvme_read_cqe
-> nvme_cqe_valid
static inline bool nvme_cqe_valid(struct nvme_queue *nvmeq, u16 head,
u16 phase)
{
return (le16_to_cpu(nvmeq->cqes[head].status) & 1) == phase;
}
Sincerely
Jianchao
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-02-28 15:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-02-27 8:46 [PATCH] nvme-pci: assign separate irq vectors for adminq and ioq0 Jianchao Wang
2018-02-27 15:13 ` Keith Busch
2018-02-28 2:53 ` jianchao.wang
2018-02-28 15:27 ` Keith Busch
2018-02-28 15:42 ` jianchao.wang [this message]
2018-02-28 15:46 ` jianchao.wang
2018-02-28 15:53 ` Keith Busch
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=8066e06c-90f4-c21b-e36f-89f6e8ca28c5@oracle.com \
--to=jianchao.w.wang@oracle.com \
--cc=axboe@fb.com \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=keith.busch@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=sagi@grimberg.me \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).