Received: by 10.223.185.116 with SMTP id b49csp6317075wrg; Wed, 28 Feb 2018 07:28:35 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELsRelpK+Qcid4EkGyaWz17zItTv6HqABMqUHSKN6bvSvHtEkMUQT04liniPKQV9l3TLS7FS X-Received: by 10.101.75.199 with SMTP id p7mr6884914pgr.0.1519831715001; Wed, 28 Feb 2018 07:28:35 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1519831714; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=USxcUmEcwgH9GUZ2K81Q921y7mDbeD7J/pZwHl42yyZ2pJc6ccUS1qRR1hOyQjRsBr rcMxV5X+ab2IC59xhErDUUYhOxhX10OpCRSXAiTkU8n5i1V+WhYDwabkBvl55HE6kunK 88+2R26Mn2ddr1KOPUg4++I/Q7FdOePXyec53QF+lS7cQM58ntZkEawoMO3MLPWgpy/y Z53aC+5QJDPRudKK0AZCAyCqASQuaSzf/Syc0h2++NTTqcnaxkRIT3O9N4CApv0IGg/a nBl9ZdMhHsrlBX9cSSW4E2Wb7Ml63hfZWQ+nfCBeQDFMnE/uryxJTZDuHeOOBpNlSGlv NfAA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date:arc-authentication-results; bh=/sLyLIywijwDJmwUUyfnjDJvwX8mU2kHEK+guoPO/2w=; b=jlTJ/SvAxYEQ64Po+2u6PEZgKlVS4ldj4I20SHShDC+uc6nrb+qSY8hgIBNLoJCesh REtkIpriUznsP4t+fi0gRdgdUSxwnbnhCi16RXWEeQCrgTT4OTiKnE21FTWhDUSlMWs1 5SaySGlU0okeVTIKtb+/1MGVWvJGvMmgw8YYiSUlpYipbW+R/DrJj0Djo/CkFLLpwX1W 7lbxGR7sRTNcOXBLQUcEVfMN8dXuI7nlitJmWhum5skcmaenNF7tuXn2tAQ1g2bsAU5g O+VynfIKjeOUVr+nrDVBxB/w2QUqIanGXbMFvWBZ1Et2ngAeY8oAwBM2T0h9HZKs23tG UTkQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id e68si1402186pfa.94.2018.02.28.07.28.20; Wed, 28 Feb 2018 07:28:34 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932729AbeB1P12 (ORCPT + 99 others); Wed, 28 Feb 2018 10:27:28 -0500 Received: from mga18.intel.com ([134.134.136.126]:30179 "EHLO mga18.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932748AbeB1P1V (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Feb 2018 10:27:21 -0500 X-Amp-Result: UNSCANNABLE X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27]) by orsmga106.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 28 Feb 2018 07:27:20 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.47,406,1515484800"; d="scan'208";a="31324427" Received: from unknown (HELO localhost.localdomain) ([10.232.112.44]) by orsmga003.jf.intel.com with ESMTP; 28 Feb 2018 07:27:20 -0800 Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2018 08:27:41 -0700 From: Keith Busch To: "jianchao.wang" Cc: axboe@fb.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, hch@lst.de, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, sagi@grimberg.me Subject: Re: [PATCH] nvme-pci: assign separate irq vectors for adminq and ioq0 Message-ID: <20180228152741.GA16002@localhost.localdomain> References: <1519721177-2099-1-git-send-email-jianchao.w.wang@oracle.com> <20180227151311.GD10832@localhost.localdomain> <9252f0a1-f3e5-414b-db49-e8053dfa48a6@oracle.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9252f0a1-f3e5-414b-db49-e8053dfa48a6@oracle.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 10:53:31AM +0800, jianchao.wang wrote: > On 02/27/2018 11:13 PM, Keith Busch wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 27, 2018 at 04:46:17PM +0800, Jianchao Wang wrote: > >> Currently, adminq and ioq0 share the same irq vector. This is > >> unfair for both amdinq and ioq0. > >> - For adminq, its completion irq has to be bound on cpu0. > >> - For ioq0, when the irq fires for io completion, the adminq irq > >> action has to be checked also. > > > > This change log could use some improvements. Why is it bad if admin > > interrupts affinity is with cpu0? > > adminq interrupts should be able to fire everywhere. > do we have any reason to bound it on cpu0 ? Your patch will have the admin vector CPU affinity mask set to 0xff..ff. The first set bit for an online CPU is the one the IRQ handler will run on, so the admin queue will still only run on CPU 0. > > Are you able to measure _any_ performance difference on IO queue 1 vs IO > > queue 2 that you can attribute to IO queue 1's sharing vector 0? > > Actually, I didn't get any performance improving on my own NVMe card. > But it may be needed on some enterprise card, especially the media is persist memory. > nvme_irq will be invoked twice when ioq0 irq fires, this will introduce another unnecessary DMA > accessing on cq entry. A CPU reading its own memory isn't a DMA. It's just a cheap memory read.