[lkml]   [2018]   [Sep]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Affinity managed interrupts vs non-managed interrupts
On Wed, Aug 29, 2018 at 04:16:23PM +0530, Sumit Saxena wrote:
> > Could you explain a bit what the specific use case the extra 16 vectors
> is?
> We are trying to avoid the penalty due to one interrupt per IO completion
> and decided to coalesce interrupts on these extra 16 reply queues.
> For regular 72 reply queues, we will not coalesce interrupts as for low IO
> workload, interrupt coalescing may take more time due to less IO
> completions.
> In IO submission path, driver will decide which set of reply queues
> (either extra 16 reply queues or regular 72 reply queues) to be picked
> based on IO workload.

The point I don't get here is why you need separate reply queues for
the interrupt coalesce setting. Shouldn't this just be a flag at
submission time that indicates the amount of coalescing that should

What is the benefit of having different completion queues?

 \ /
  Last update: 2018-09-11 11:17    [W:0.109 / U:0.372 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site