From: mlangsdo@redhat.com (Mark Langsdorf)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH]irqchip/irq-gic-v3:Avoid a waste of LPI resource
Date: Wed, 9 May 2018 09:32:27 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <78df845d-0788-3cbd-e435-5a3a8221fdc8@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8898674D84E3B24BA3A2D289B872026A69EF9AF9@G01JPEXMBKW03>
On 04/30/2018 02:53 AM, Zhang, Lei wrote:
> Hi Marc
>
> thanks for your opinions.
>
>> How many is many? Are they PCI? Or something else?
>
>> As it is, this patch will break Multi-MSI and some other platforms that
>> do require a higher allocation granule.
>>
>> Depending on whether you're using PCI or some other bus, we can probably
>> come up with a solution that works for everyone. But I need more
>> information on this.
>
> Actually it is our original interconnect device not on PCI but on our original bus.
> This device has many sub devices around one thousand, and each sub device requires only a few LPIs.
>
> As I explained in point1, each Device ID can still allocate enough LPIs more than IRQS_PER_CHUNK by increasing chunks.
> So I couldn't understand why this patch will break Multi-MSI.
>
> By the way, 32 seems a good default value for IRQS_PER_CHUNK.
> So, I want to write another patch to make IRQ_PER_CHUNK a variable which can be changed by kernel parameter.
> What do you think of this idea?
If you intend your devices to be supported by server distributions,
instead of embedded kernels, having IRQ_PER_CHUNK as a kernel parameter
is not a good idea. The server distributions are going to compile, test,
and support a single kernel for all server systems, and are not going to
have a special kernel to support one vendor's systems that has a
different IRQ_PER_CHUNK parameter.
So even if you wrote that patch and it was accepted into the kernel, the
server distribution kernels are still going to set IRQ_PER_CHUNK to 32.
Marc's suggestion of implementing a glue layer, and then changing the
glue layer interface to pass the allocation requirements up to this
driver is the best solution that can be supported for server products.
--Mark Langsdorf
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-05-09 14:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <8898674D84E3B24BA3A2D289B872026A69EECF90@G01JPEXMBKW03>
2018-04-27 14:12 ` [PATCH]irqchip/irq-gic-v3:Avoid a waste of LPI resource Marc Zyngier
2018-04-30 7:53 ` Zhang, Lei
2018-04-30 10:20 ` Marc Zyngier
2018-05-03 6:46 ` Zhang, Lei
2018-05-09 14:32 ` Mark Langsdorf [this message]
2018-05-10 13:09 ` Zhang, Lei
2018-05-10 14:12 ` Marc Zyngier
2018-05-12 1:47 ` Zhang, Lei
2018-05-18 9:49 ` Zhang, Lei
2018-05-21 6:12 ` Zhang, Lei
2018-04-27 14:00 Zhang, 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=78df845d-0788-3cbd-e435-5a3a8221fdc8@redhat.com \
--to=mlangsdo@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox