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;
To:     John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/1] genirq: Make threaded handler use irq affinity  for managed interrupt
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8;
 format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Date:   Fri, 20 Dec 2019 16:16:31 +0000
From:   Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
Cc:     Ming Lei <ming.lei@redhat.com>, <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        "chenxiang (M)" <chenxiang66@hisilicon.com>,
        <bigeasy@linutronix.de>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        <hare@suse.com>, <hch@lst.de>, <axboe@kernel.dk>,
        <bvanassche@acm.org>, <peterz@infradead.org>, <mingo@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <a5154365-59c5-429b-559e-94ad6dffcdb0@huawei.com>
References: <1575642904-58295-1-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com>
 <1575642904-58295-2-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com>
 <20191207080335.GA6077@ming.t460p>
 <78a10958-fdc9-0576-0c39-6079b9749d39@huawei.com>
 <20191210014335.GA25022@ming.t460p>
 <0ad37515-c22d-6857-65a2-cc28256a8afa@huawei.com>
 <20191212223805.GA24463@ming.t460p>
 <d4b89ecf-7ced-d5d6-fc02-6d4257580465@huawei.com>
 <20191213131822.GA19876@ming.t460p>
 <b7f3bcea-84ec-f9f6-a3aa-007ae712415f@huawei.com>
 <20191214135641.5a817512@why>
 <7db89b97-1b9e-8dd1-684a-3eef1b1af244@huawei.com>
 <50d9ba606e1e3ee1665a0328ffac67ac@www.loen.fr>
 <a5f6a542-2dbc-62de-52e2-bd5413b5db51@huawei.com>
 <68058fd28c939b8e065524715494de95@www.loen.fr>
 <ac5b5a25-df2e-18e9-6b0f-60af8c7cec3b@huawei.com>
 <687cbcc4-89d9-63ea-a246-ce2abaae501a@huawei.com>
 <0fd543f8ffd90f90deb691aea1c275b4@www.loen.fr>
 <a5154365-59c5-429b-559e-94ad6dffcdb0@huawei.com>
Message-ID: <a46aaad9e00dbfa5817b3698450ae7be@www.loen.fr>
User-Agent: Roundcube Webmail/0.7.2
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On 2019-12-20 15:38, John Garry wrote:

> I've already done something experimental for the driver to manage the
> affinity, and performance is generally much better:
>
> 
> https://github.com/hisilicon/kernel-dev/commit/e15bd404ed1086fed44da34ed3bd37a8433688a7
>
> But I still think it's wise to only consider managed interrupts for 
> now.

Sure. We've lived with it so far, we can make it last a bit longer... 
;-)

>>
>>> JFYI, about NVMe CPU lockup issue, there are 2 works on going here:
>>>
>>> 
>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-nvme/20191209175622.1964-1-kbusch@kernel.org/T/#t
>>>
>>>
>>> 
>>> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-block/20191218071942.22336-1-ming.lei@redhat.com/T/#t
>>>
>> I've also managed to trigger some of them now that I have access to
>> a decent box with nvme storage.
>
> I only have 2x NVMe SSDs when this occurs - I should not be hitting 
> this...

Same configuration here. And the number of interrupts is pretty
low (less that 20k/s per CPU), so I doubt this is interrupt related.

> Out of curiosity, have you tried
>> with the SMMU disabled? I'm wondering whether we hit some livelock
>> condition on unmapping buffers...
>
> No, but I can give it a try. Doing that should lower the CPU usage,
> though, so maybe masks the issue - probably not.

I wonder whether we could end-up in some form of unmap storm on
completion, with a CPU being starved trying to insert its TLBI
command into the queue.

Anyway, more digging in perspective.

         M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...