lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Oct]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH blk-next 1/2] blk-mq-rdma: Delete not-used multi-queue RDMA map queue code
On Mon, Oct 05, 2020 at 10:38:17AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 02, 2020 at 01:20:35PM -0700, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
> >> Well, why would they change it? The whole point of the infrastructure
> >> is that there is a single sane affinity setting for a given setup. Now
> >> that setting needed some refinement from the original series (e.g. the
> >> current series about only using housekeeping cpus if cpu isolation is
> >> in use). But allowing random users to modify affinity is just a receipe
> >> for a trainwreck.
> >
> > Well allowing people to mangle irq affinity settings seem to be a hard
> > requirement from the discussions in the past.
> >
> >> So I think we need to bring this back ASAP, as doing affinity right
> >> out of the box is an absolute requirement for sane performance without
> >> all the benchmarketing deep magic.
> >
> > Well, it's hard to say that setting custom irq affinity settings is
> > deemed non-useful to anyone and hence should be prevented. I'd expect
> > that irq settings have a sane default that works and if someone wants to
> > change it, it can but there should be no guarantees on optimal
> > performance. But IIRC this had some dependencies on drivers and some
> > more infrastructure to handle dynamic changes...
>
> The problem is that people change random settings. We need to generalize
> it into a sane API (e.g. the housekeeping CPUs thing which totally makes
> sense).

I don't see many people jump on the bandwagon, someone should do it, but
who will? I personally have no knowledge in that area to do anything
meaningful.

Thanks

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-10-06 06:58    [W:0.048 / U:0.104 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site