Re: Regarding patch "block/blk-mq: Don't complete locally if capacities are different"

[Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@acm.org>]

On 8/21/24 5:29 AM, MANISH PANDEY wrote:
> How about introducing a new rq_affinity ( may be rq_affinity = 3) for 
> using cpus_equal_capacity() using new flag QUEUE_FLAG_SAME_CAPACITY.
> 
> if (cpu == rq->mq_ctx->cpu ||
>      (!test_bit(QUEUE_FLAG_SAME_FORCE, &rq->q->queue_flags) &&
>        cpus_share_cache(cpu, rq->mq_ctx->cpu) &&
> +      (test_bit(QUEUE_FLAG_CPU_CAPACITY, &rq->q->queue_flags))
>         && cpus_equal_capacity(cpu, rq->mq_ctx->cpu)))
>          return false;
> 
> Could you please consider raising similar change, if this seems fine for 
> all.

I'm not sure that a change like the above would be acceptable.

What is the performance impact of the above change? Redirecting
completion interrupts from a slow core to a fast core causes additional
cache misses if the I/O was submitted from a slow core. Are there
perhaps use cases for which the above change slows down I/O?

Thanks,

Bart.