All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>
Cc: Peter Xu <peterx@redhat.com>, Juri Lelli <juri.lelli@redhat.com>,
	Ming Lei <minlei@redhat.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-block@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Kernel-managed IRQ affinity (cont)
Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2020 14:45:00 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87r202b19f.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200111024835.GA24575@ming.t460p>

Ming,

Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com> writes:
> On Fri, Jan 10, 2020 at 08:43:14PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com> writes:
>> > That is why I try to exclude isolated CPUs from interrupt effective affinity,
>> > turns out the approach is simple and doable.
>> 
>> Yes, it's doable. But it still is inconsistent behaviour. Assume the
>> following configuration:
>> 
>>   8 CPUs CPU0,1 assigned for housekeeping
>> 
>> With 8 queues the proposed change does nothing because each queue is
>> mapped to exactly one CPU.
>
> That is expected behavior for this RT case, given userspace won't submit
> IO from isolated CPUs.

What is _this_ RT case? We really don't implement policy for a specific
use case. If the kernel implements a policy then it has to be generally
useful and practical.

>> With 4 queues you get the following:
>> 
>>  CPU0,1       queue 0
>>  CPU2,3       queue 1
>>  CPU4,5       queue 2
>>  CPU6,7       queue 3
>> 
>> No effect on the isolated CPUs either.
>> 
>> With 2 queues you get the following:
>> 
>>  CPU0,1,2,3   queue 0
>>  CPU4,5,6,7   queue 1
>> 
>> So here the isolated CPUs 2 and 3 get the isolation, but 4-7
>> not. That's perhaps intended, but definitely not documented.
>
> That is intentional change, given no IO will be submitted from 4-7
> most of times in RT case, so it is fine to select effective CPU from
> isolated CPUs in this case. As peter mentioned, IO may just be submitted
> from isolated CPUs during booting. Once the system is setup, no IO
> comes from isolated CPUs, then no interrupt is delivered to isolated
> CPUs, then meet RT's requirement.

Again. This is a specific usecase. Is this generally applicable?

> We can document this change somewhere.

Yes, this needs to be documented very clearly with that command line
parameter.

>> So you really need to make your mind up and describe what the intended
>> effect of this is and why you think that the result is correct.
>
> In short, if there is at least one housekeeping available in the
> interrupt's affinity, we choose effective CPU from housekeeping CPUs.
> Otherwise, keep the current behavior wrt. selecting effective CPU.
>
> With this approach, no interrupts can be delivered to isolated CPUs
> if no IOs are submitted from these CPUs.
>
> Please let us know if it addresses your concerns.

Mostly. See above.

Thanks,

        tglx



  reply	other threads:[~2020-01-14 13:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-12-16 19:57 Kernel-managed IRQ affinity (cont) Peter Xu
2019-12-19  8:28 ` Ming Lei
2019-12-19 14:32   ` Peter Xu
2019-12-19 16:11     ` Ming Lei
2019-12-19 18:09       ` Peter Xu
2019-12-23 19:18         ` Peter Xu
2020-01-09 20:02       ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-01-10  1:28         ` Ming Lei
2020-01-10 19:43           ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-01-11  2:48             ` Ming Lei
2020-01-14 13:45               ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2020-01-14 23:38                 ` Ming Lei

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=87r202b19f.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de \
    --to=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=juri.lelli@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ming.lei@redhat.com \
    --cc=minlei@redhat.com \
    --cc=peterx@redhat.com \
    /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.