From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (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 0C3A21BC085; Mon, 11 Nov 2024 22:13:23 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1731363204; cv=none; b=UdstJqfoFJ3538L4dOzEWbWdnh+NG4f/1rWPrLXaFnixjM3TtM8zY46TGdDKv0d32Sm5U1+khR68C4EqvPAuF1QfUds/dUEDBbKR923pHR2wzhETqTuh55v3u8kBQ/K9S7rmrp+g0mxT77hLePhDFykKl2xXBwcgvH0tdMygP4E= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1731363204; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ojNX7ewQ5mBn+8GJnYQlZeE9p4+dRMgQGrBXvhs2+fI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=m3dqsvGOtMFKSYZvPlxpSw/jPxQSL4UJJNXhDNmypDRyBCASM25lIg6eF0Yf948n0S0YbB3rNg77mGpuFnhfV6CYE5/b5tBJZFlqsPgdkTXZwFRtkGtJ+pu+HUZd01JaNRUyXpgRA81JbNX4uiWJMNZjlA1wjBEzGGkIDNWHHFI= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=TCQxBffB; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="TCQxBffB" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 103DDC4CECF; Mon, 11 Nov 2024 22:13:23 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1731363203; bh=ojNX7ewQ5mBn+8GJnYQlZeE9p4+dRMgQGrBXvhs2+fI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=TCQxBffBXyPKj2xKTDl6//xKba0ovCTA31loZDkm0SFTz3sw6YR/BHM/8Le7DZy7s aiCYcBwPe8OWe/MfHs4mGq7nc3s7/t+YjKfEyECHQK/iqvBQlsJs35JxN7X6ZfVN08 slWovi9O55skKw5snL4fdwVQtWc9kESHJ0xulDXw5Qoh4ldQzDzpv8fSvzFFFch0pV 3V2GeJPXt22BZJYmLPnfGNRntFuddZsepZXdE0M+puQi0SvYuWd2AzvoeXB1w12n1K Q6oZxiU8WsQlGyfbiZuw6JZuAxamncoYMg1bWVwxR1eT6ibE0HDBv2MJAe2CTM7yqf 551OIgpkhLONw== Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2024 14:13:21 -0800 From: Jakub Kicinski To: Caleb Sander Mateos Cc: Saeed Mahameed , Leon Romanovsky , Tariq Toukan , Andrew Lunn , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Paolo Abeni , Parav Pandit , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v4] mlx5/core: Schedule EQ comp tasklet only if necessary Message-ID: <20241111141321.0d723c9d@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <20241105204000.1807095-1-csander@purestorage.com> References: <20241105204000.1807095-1-csander@purestorage.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Tue, 5 Nov 2024 13:39:59 -0700 Caleb Sander Mateos wrote: > Currently, the mlx5_eq_comp_int() interrupt handler schedules a tasklet > to call mlx5_cq_tasklet_cb() if it processes any completions. For CQs > whose completions don't need to be processed in tasklet context, this > adds unnecessary overhead. In a heavy TCP workload, we see 4% of CPU > time spent on the tasklet_trylock() in tasklet_action_common(), with a > smaller amount spent on the atomic operations in tasklet_schedule(), > tasklet_clear_sched(), and locking the spinlock in mlx5_cq_tasklet_cb(). > TCP completions are handled by mlx5e_completion_event(), which schedules > NAPI to poll the queue, so they don't need tasklet processing. Applied, thanks