From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from 008.lax.mailroute.net (008.lax.mailroute.net [199.89.1.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ECBB315B0E4; Wed, 28 Aug 2024 13:47:26 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=199.89.1.11 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1724852848; cv=none; b=CRio66S2/rOF9qG8bRBKSW862g+frdJMw98tbfFVKzvVPZYqAfa8nqPM5u0ztN8n+gEsidZ5u9NPWt3mX4Gmss6kW5Ke17FwMAOS3a5+HK+SsZ5V6YQL9mtZFjWb3mUDDVxstZDq4t2nuQGsMVlx+JkY9a42J30RutkRYk0WNOk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1724852848; c=relaxed/simple; bh=PhyhFSq2ssqfE87Z8rulgW9y6ISQIaoU1dXRLUiK4to=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=bHKh+0YYTluEegdGJsc7qpsl4Kkdvn3eBEhkGrArsptwZLzpRE0YGPdGRMcGAGJVSOc4ybIaZeF3vuqe4eJZo8ShTnQpadLK6hPfrzhyYgxPVKFHan0DEBK5AX7JrgFfFVPz8SkVH4Z4xde/+IEbhJeY60GHAcXwn/OhnCoHV2M= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=acm.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=acm.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=acm.org header.i=@acm.org header.b=RGvYF1st; arc=none smtp.client-ip=199.89.1.11 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=acm.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=acm.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=acm.org header.i=@acm.org header.b="RGvYF1st" Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by 008.lax.mailroute.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4Wv5M226tWz6ClY92; Wed, 28 Aug 2024 13:47:26 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=acm.org; h= content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:in-reply-to :from:from:content-language:references:subject:subject :user-agent:mime-version:date:date:message-id:received:received; s=mr01; t=1724852842; x=1727444843; bh=8HL0xEOnM68xTrIbWEcNqu71 FrJVlvPt0DHaEvk1u08=; b=RGvYF1stSw9zMiJSUwLphKJmx5HVqKxc8/3gdeW5 3Y2WlnuQRHHW0w4ZLY6GxmsBzuHHm6rTxq3ZI/tnxD16IHdf86/NOUm/AcAqpKcw Yi31YZGYrNC3CDB4BkT8TYytetvEOqYh6pspsX0hIgAxVczqSxbdh500jXu1aDWR IbOcGDRM2Y4NfedqIkML08daEezbJr3YECGiLh4HuCLEFHSGYl1/hxwdBUxiIgRJ SX9focuhDzdNASpuuy/yffcDd/It6cn1VpiFZOLVyxLOc6t21fW7pTr/Vn60sers rv5pUl5LR82bpdnlgOlG50Guv+OSDtdqxxw03lYhAquHZQ== X-Virus-Scanned: by MailRoute Received: from 008.lax.mailroute.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (008.lax [127.0.0.1]) (mroute_mailscanner, port 10029) with LMTP id u71Aahn4zS-I; Wed, 28 Aug 2024 13:47:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [172.16.58.82] (modemcable170.180-37-24.static.videotron.ca [24.37.180.170]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: bvanassche@acm.org) by 008.lax.mailroute.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4Wv5Lt5znwz6ClbJB; Wed, 28 Aug 2024 13:47:18 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <03e92755-2011-4c43-8a1c-f1ad9a1382eb@acm.org> Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2024 09:47:17 -0400 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-block@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH] blk-mq: Allow complete locally if capacities are different To: Christian Loehle , Manish Pandey , Jens Axboe Cc: linux-block@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, quic_nitirawa@quicinc.com, quic_bhaskarv@quicinc.com, quic_narepall@quicinc.com, quic_rampraka@quicinc.com, quic_cang@quicinc.com, quic_nguyenb@quicinc.com, Qais Yousef , Dietmar Eggemann References: <20240828114958.29422-1-quic_mapa@quicinc.com> <7661afec-168d-406e-903b-a2dc9adf6408@arm.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Bart Van Assche In-Reply-To: <7661afec-168d-406e-903b-a2dc9adf6408@arm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 8/28/24 8:26 AM, Christian Loehle wrote: > On 8/28/24 13:13, Bart Van Assche wrote: >> I think that the following is missing from the above description: >> - Mentioning that this is for an unusual interrupt routing technology >> =C2=A0 (SoC sends the interrupt to another CPU core than what has bee= n >> =C2=A0=C2=A0 specified in the smp_affinity mask). >=20 > FWIW on !mcq that doesn't have to be the case. Hmm ... is there any x86 architecture that ignores the smp_affinity mask? I have not yet encountered an x86 system that does not respect the smp_affinity mask. Thanks, Bart.