From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Chris Friesen" Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2]: Remote softirq invocation infrastructure. Date: Mon, 22 Sep 2008 15:22:36 -0600 Message-ID: <48D80C9C.2070108@nortel.com> References: <20080919.234824.223177211.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, jens.axboe@oracle.com, steffen.klassert@secunet.com To: David Miller Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20080919.234824.223177211.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org David Miller wrote: > Jens Axboe has written some hacks for the block layer that allow > queueing softirq work to remote cpus. In the context of the block > layer he used this facility to trigger the softirq block I/O > completion on the same cpu where the I/O was submitted. > I intend to use this > for receive side flow seperation on non-multiqueue network cards. I'm not sure this belongs in this particular thread but I was interested in how you're planning on doing this? Is there going to be a way for userspace to specify which traffic flows they'd like to direct to particular cpus, or will the kernel try to figure it out on the fly? We have application guys that would like very much to be able to nail specific apps to specific cores and have the kernel send all their packets to those cores for processing. Chris