linuxppc-dev.lists.ozlabs.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ganesh G R <ganeshgr@linux.ibm.com>
To: "Oliver O'Halloran" <oohall@gmail.com>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, mahesh@linux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/3] Asynchronous EEH recovery
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2023 13:40:01 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <c2eff602-a6d0-2b8d-2c11-5a556b0f4493@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAOSf1CGzmbbs16zCAV8_NN49Sd8ifi-4Dvo7wXdVNDE-j76qPQ@mail.gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1923 bytes --]


On 6/13/23 8:06 AM, Oliver O'Halloran wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 13, 2023 at 11:44 AM Ganesh Goudar<ganeshgr@linux.ibm.com>  wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> EEH recovery is currently serialized and these patches shorten
>> the time taken for EEH recovery by making the recovery to run
>> in parallel. The original author of these patches is Sam Bobroff,
>> I have rebased and tested these patches.
>>
>> On powervm with 64 VFs from same PHB,  I see approximately 48%
>> reduction in time taken in EEH recovery.
>>
>> On powernv with 9 network cards, Where 2 cards installed on one
>> PHB and 1 card on each of the rest of the PHBs, Providing 20 PFs
>> in total. I see approximately 33% reduction in time taken in EEH
>> recovery.
>>
>> These patches were originally posted as separate RFCs by Sam, And
>> I rebased and posted these patches almost a year back, I stopped
>> pursuing these patches as I was not able test this on powernv, Due
>> to the issues in drivers of cards I was testing this on, Which are
>> now resolved. Since I am re-posting this after long time, Posting
>> this as a fresh RFC, Please comment.
> What changes have you made since the last time you posted this series?
> If the patches are the same then the comments I posted last time still
> apply.

Hi Oliver, You asked about the way we are testing this on powervm, You expressed
concerns about having this on powernv, suggested to have this feature just for
powervm for now, and also expressed concerns on having two locks.

On powervm using two port card we are instantiating 64 VFS, for an lpar and injecting
the error on the bus from phyp, to observe the behavior.
I was able to test this on powernv with 16 PFs from 8 cards installed on separate PHBs,
Where I saw considerable performance improvement.
Regarding two locks idea, I may not have tested it for all scenarios, So far I have not
faced any issue, Are you suggesting a different approach.

Thanks

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2485 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2023-07-17  8:46 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-06-13  1:43 [RFC 0/3] Asynchronous EEH recovery Ganesh Goudar
2023-06-13  1:43 ` [RFC 1/3] powerpc/eeh: Synchronization for safety Ganesh Goudar
2023-06-13  1:43 ` [RFC 2/3] powerpc/eeh: Provide a unique ID for each EEH recovery Ganesh Goudar
2023-06-13  1:43 ` [RFC 3/3] powerpc/eeh: Asynchronous recovery Ganesh Goudar
2023-06-13  2:36 ` [RFC 0/3] Asynchronous EEH recovery Oliver O'Halloran
2023-07-17  8:10   ` Ganesh G R [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2022-08-16  3:27 Ganesh Goudar
2022-08-17  7:16 ` Oliver O'Halloran
2022-09-02  0:19 ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-09-15 10:15   ` Ganesh
2023-01-25 14:04     ` Christophe Leroy

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=c2eff602-a6d0-2b8d-2c11-5a556b0f4493@linux.ibm.com \
    --to=ganeshgr@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=mahesh@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=oohall@gmail.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).