On 06/13/2014 01:22 PM, Keith Busch wrote: > One performance oddity we observe is that servicing the interrupt on the > thread sibling of the core that submitted the I/O is the worst performing > cpu you can chose; it's actually better to use a different core on the > same node. At least that's true as long as you're not utilizing the cpus > for other work, so YMMV.
This doesn't match what I see here. Just ran some test cases - both sync, and higher QD. For sync performance, core or thread sibling is the best choice, other CPUs next. That is pretty logical. For a more loaded run, thread sibling ends up being a better choice than core, since core runs out of steam (255K vs 275K here). And thread sibling is still a marginally better choice than some other core on the same node. Which pretty much matches my expectations of what the best mappings would be. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
