All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Arthur Kepner <akepner@sgi.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCHv2] kernel/irq: allow more precise irq affinity policies
Date: Sun, 26 Sep 2010 20:57:51 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100927035751.GI20474@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LFD.2.00.1009232015180.2416@localhost6.localdomain6>

On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 08:36:35PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> 
> I thought more about this and came to the conclusion that this
> facility is completely overengineered and mostly useless except for a
> little detail.
> 
> The only problem which it solves is to prevent that we run out of
> vectors on the low numbered cpus when that NIC which insists to create
> one irq per cpu starts up.

Yep, that's the problem.

> 
> Fine, I can see that this is a problem, but we do not need this
> complete nightmare to solve it. We can do that way simpler.
> 
>  1) There is a patch from your coworker to work around that in the low
>     level x86 code, which is probably working, but suboptimal and not
>     generic
>

I don't know what you're referring to there.
 
>  2) We already know that the NIC requested the irq on node N. So when
>     we set it up, we just honour the wish of the driver as long as it
>     fits in the default (or modified) affinity mask and restrict the
>     affinity to the cpus on that very node.
> 
>     That makes a whole lot of sense: The driver already knows on which
>     cpus it wants to see the irq, because it allocated queues and
>     stuff there.
> 
>     So that's probably a 10 lines or less patch do fix that.
> ....

OK, the simple approach is fine with me. I'll send a patch in 
a minute.

-- 
Arthur

      reply	other threads:[~2010-09-27  3:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-09-22 23:52 [RFC/PATCHv2] kernel/irq: allow more precise irq affinity policies Arthur Kepner
2010-09-23 10:56 ` Thomas Gleixner
2010-09-23 18:36   ` Thomas Gleixner
2010-09-27  3:57     ` Arthur Kepner [this message]

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=20100927035751.GI20474@sgi.com \
    --to=akepner@sgi.com \
    --cc=bhutchings@solarflare.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.