RE: Affinity managed interrupts vs non-managed interrupts

> > 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 differe

Re: Affinity managed interrupts vs non-managed interrupts

On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 04:16:23PM +0530, Sumit Saxena wrote: > > Could you explain a bit what the specific use case the extra 16 vectors > is? > We are trying to avoid the penalty due to one interrupt per IO completion > and decided to coalesce interrupts on these extra 16 reply queues. > For regu

RE: Affinity managed interrupts vs non-managed interrupts

On Mon, 3 Sep 2018, Kashyap Desai wrote: > I am using " for-4.19/block " and this particular patch "a0c9259 > irq/matrix: Spread interrupts on allocation" is included. Can you please try against 4.19-rc2 or later? > I can see that 16 extra reply queues via pre_vectors are still assigned to > CPU

RE: Affinity managed interrupts vs non-managed interrupts

> > > > It is not yet finalized, but it can be based on per sdev outstanding, > > shost_busy etc. > > We want to use special 16 reply queue for IO acceleration (these queues are > > working interrupt coalescing mode. This is a h/w feature) > > TBH, this does not make any sense whatsoever. Why are y

Re: Affinity managed interrupts vs non-managed interrupts

nel.org > > Subject: Re: Affinity managed interrupts vs non-managed interrupts > > > > Hello Sumit, > Hi Ming, > Thanks for response. > > > > On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 12:04:52PM +0530, Sumit Saxena wrote: > > > Affinity managed interrupts vs non-managed i

RE: Affinity managed interrupts vs non-managed interrupts

; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Kashyap > Desai; Shivasharan Srikanteshwara > Subject: RE: Affinity managed interrupts vs non-managed interrupts > > > -Original Message- > > From: Ming Lei [mailto:ming@redhat.com] > > Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2018 2:16 PM >

RE: Affinity managed interrupts vs non-managed interrupts

> -Original Message- > From: Ming Lei [mailto:ming@redhat.com] > Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2018 2:16 PM > To: Sumit Saxena > Cc: t...@linutronix.de; h...@lst.de; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Subject: Re: Affinity managed interrupts vs non-managed interrupts &

Re: Affinity managed interrupts vs non-managed interrupts

Hello Sumit, On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 12:04:52PM +0530, Sumit Saxena wrote: > Affinity managed interrupts vs non-managed interrupts > > Hi Thomas, > > We are working on next generation MegaRAID product where requirement is- to > allocate additional 16 MSI-x vectors in addition to number of MSI-x