From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Subject: Re: Having troubles binding an SR-IOV VF to uio_pci_generic on Amazon instance Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2015 23:36:58 +0300 Message-ID: <20150930232841-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> References: <560ABF25.9030300@cloudius-systems.com> <20150929235122-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <20150929144616.4e70b44c@urahara> <20150930004714-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <560BBB62.3050502@cloudius-systems.com> <20150930102807.6e681bca@urahara> <20150930203712-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <20150930104304.7a8c8e56@urahara> <20150930212553-mutt-send-email-mst@redhat.com> <20150930200049.GC27881@scylladb.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" To: Gleb Natapov Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17AF4282 for ; Wed, 30 Sep 2015 22:37:03 +0200 (CEST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150930200049.GC27881@scylladb.com> List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: dev-bounces@dpdk.org Sender: "dev" On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 11:00:49PM +0300, Gleb Natapov wrote: > > You are increasing interrupt latency by a huge factor by channeling > > interrupts through a scheduler. Let user install an > > interrupt handler function, and be done with it. > > > Interrupt latency is not always hugely important. If you enter interrupt > mode only when idle hundred more us on a first packet will not kill you. It certainly affects worst-case latency. And if you lower interupt latency, you can go idle faster, so it affects power too. > If > interrupt latency is important then uio may be not the right solution, > but then neither is vfio. That's what I'm saying, if you don't need memory isolation you can do better than just slightly tweak existing drivers. > -- > Gleb.