From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from verein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.211]) (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 AF4DF2A1DC for ; Fri, 19 Jul 2024 05:31:22 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=213.95.11.211 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1721367085; cv=none; b=EXHUWYMrT4pPh5wWRm8zuL56dKpsa/g3cEHgpdFudMdP83idjOQw2ziBWr0uwbsBGHlVeijuCb/N+lOi0p0jDZn0VL+WFeTocoe34uy28ZkaWnHTB5BZ0Ut7uFfYHom7YX2XgjTrQ3x/+Fwcmd4893WcTE+Dyq9VcjAJq/gLyY0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1721367085; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ZE5EojKxUAjvISgGJyNlirn7RmotoRr27lG9mVhGVJI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=px+N9BdaFZixOMCCrUSbicpGkE9M48SZq3jFq8PSpZQ1tri2i7PS3p1+5OMPe7WPkRN+Sir4bkJz3JU0BynJM4WHl3UaqWx5hK+0UsMnI2bZh2epKIbmnhj4+DXJm6WyZNyqSJmLEc5LTdLgXIw6ksaZTdYfKTZc1HO63G8aKIg= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lst.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lst.de; arc=none smtp.client-ip=213.95.11.211 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=lst.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lst.de Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id 0286768BFE; Fri, 19 Jul 2024 07:31:16 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2024 07:31:16 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Ping Gan Cc: hare@suse.de, sagi@grimberg.me, hch@lst.de, kch@nvidia.com, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ping.gan@dell.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] nvmet: support unbound_wq for RDMA and TCP Message-ID: <20240719053116.GA21474@lst.de> References: <20240717091451.111158-1-jacky_gam_2001@163.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20240717091451.111158-1-jacky_gam_2001@163.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) On Wed, Jul 17, 2024 at 05:14:49PM +0800, Ping Gan wrote: > When running nvmf on SMP platform, current nvme target's RDMA and > TCP use bounded workqueue to handle IO, but when there is other high > workload on the system(eg: kubernetes), the competition between the > bounded kworker and other workload is very radical. To decrease the > resource race of OS among them, this patchset will enable unbounded > workqueue for nvmet-rdma and nvmet-tcp; besides that, it can also > get some performance improvement. And this patchset bases on previous > discussion from below session. So why aren't we using unbound workqueues by default? Who makea the policy decision and how does anyone know which one to chose?