From: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: multiqueue interrupts...
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2008 12:18:41 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080919181840.GE30956@parisc-linux.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <41b516cb0809191050t6c9783dele8926f697854bb1@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 7:38 PM, David Miller wrote:
> During kernel summit I was speaking with Arjan van de Ven
> about irqbalanced and networking card multiqueue interrupts.
>
> In order for irqbalanaced to make smart decisions, what needs to
> happen in drivers is that the individual interrupts need to be
> named in such a way that he can tell by looking at /proc/interrupts
> output that these interrupts are related.
>
> So on a multiqueue card with 2 RX queues and 2 TX queues we'd
> have names like:
>
> eth0-rx-0
> eth0-rx-1
> eth0-tx-0
> eth0-tx-1
>
> So let's make an effort to get this done right in 2.6.28 and meanwhile
> Arjan can add the irqbalanced code.
Instead of having magic names, how about we put something in
/proc/irq/nnn/ that lets us tell which interrupts are connected to which
queues?
Another idea I've been thinking about is a flag to tell irqbalance to
leave stuff alone, and we just set stuff up right the first time.
We were discussing various options around multiqueue at first the scsi
multiqueue BOF and later at the PCI MSI BOF. There's a general feeling
that drivers should be given some guidance about how many queues they
should be enabling, and the sysadmin needs to be the one telling the
PCI layer, which drivers should then query. The use cases vary wildly
depending whether you're doing routing or are an end node, whether
you're doing v12n or NUMA or both and on just how many cards and cpus
you have.
In a storage / NUMA configuration we really want to set up one queue per
cpu / package / node (depending on resource constraints) and know that
the interrupt is going to come back to the same cpu / package / node.
We definitely don't want irqbalanced moving the interrupt around.
--
Matthew Wilcox Intel Open Source Technology Centre
"Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this
operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such
a retrograde step."
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-09-19 18:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-09-19 2:38 multiqueue interrupts David Miller
2008-09-19 11:38 ` Ben Hutchings
2008-09-19 12:29 ` Brice Goglin
2008-09-19 20:12 ` David Miller
2008-09-19 20:12 ` David Miller
[not found] ` <41b516cb0809191050t6c9783dele8926f697854bb1@mail.gmail.com>
2008-09-19 18:18 ` Matthew Wilcox [this message]
2008-09-19 20:14 ` David Miller
2008-09-19 20:57 ` Brandeburg, Jesse
2008-09-19 21:09 ` David Miller
2008-09-19 21:15 ` Matthew Wilcox
2008-09-19 22:11 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-09-19 22:24 ` Andy Fleming
2008-09-19 22:28 ` Arjan van de Ven
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=20080919181840.GE30956@parisc-linux.org \
--to=matthew@wil.cx \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).