From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from linux.microsoft.com (linux.microsoft.com [13.77.154.182]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0847340401; Fri, 9 Oct 2026 06:52:03 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=13.77.154.182 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1791528724; cv=none; b=GOgdQSk8AW7irJF831EcI8LaLS2VsU7ZHKky7l9vwYYCnaSBtRxnX0CbGrAuL8PQGy3f4qOVKiGW35QZxH6S0Q9O7mQBDIrhPB3qN/n03Y2ToRw2bOR7NhVXAhAn3RmeOTEGlbnu5mUSDhfqHtYlN8uy1LP/gDUpzZhyGtuiLeA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1791528724; c=relaxed/simple; bh=K+zcPdGKYhEz/GfXGMxYBlKNl9J2g0VW9XMuv82NXzM=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=KF8IeMoxIDIsqcdZuBxqWOlwqlCpiLcB+wZmbzpV+G2vokiTv748LVu/HC4WTsnIR/Ybme8dfErU7EQJmeCVzUhOTV2VnAyV5T/9O6myfQNZ+4+pnnHMM2080CQNiThO0ZWsHcPFoXwL5fbISOhfdca/ZUgaBJrfpTTMe2U7Nvk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.microsoft.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.microsoft.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.microsoft.com header.i=@linux.microsoft.com header.b=Ggne8UvM; arc=none smtp.client-ip=13.77.154.182 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.microsoft.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linux.microsoft.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=linux.microsoft.com header.i=@linux.microsoft.com header.b="Ggne8UvM" Received: from [10.95.65.84] (unknown [4.194.122.144]) by linux.microsoft.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 395D020B716A; Thu, 8 Oct 2026 23:51:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 linux.microsoft.com 395D020B716A DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linux.microsoft.com; s=default; t=1791528722; bh=tzSyUMbaOVP4PqZjpoUmE5ENxFdraryzwtCBhVn0SF4=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=Ggne8UvMa+5nVG8g64tWRtb60F1gCaZM0Suf/oukOj2uYpX+kckKqMSZb9EmkchRz N/FntKp/jymWswPnwdC9jTarcU/CnhOvGh1+yryMTgZe81a1rPjg25JJmM4cILbRSL EcXKguPFQxZqxm15DiFxVS8xrxuWku3M5d8zm6a4= Message-ID: <04d88297-1732-4761-ae82-d68c441a7156@linux.microsoft.com> Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2026 12:21:57 +0530 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] nvme-pci: yield completions under scheduler pressure To: Michael Kelley , "linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org" Cc: Keith Busch , Jens Axboe , Christoph Hellwig , Sagi Grimberg , "linux-hyperv@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" References: <20261009050556.2817978-1-namjain@linux.microsoft.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Naman Jain In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 10/9/2026 11:24 AM, Michael Kelley wrote: > From: Naman Jain Sent: Thursday, October 8, 2026 10:06 PM >> >> On systems with several fast NVMe controllers, completion interrupts can >> keep returning to the same CPUs faster than scheduled work can run. Each >> handler may drain only a small number of completions, but the combined >> interrupt stream can still prevent scheduler and watchdog progress. > > See this recent proposal [1] that sounds like it is addressing the same or a > similar issue. And there is this [2] more global approach. It's worthwhile to read > through the discussion on both threads. I haven't done a detailed comparison > of either vs. your proposal. > > Michael > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/linux-nvme/20260818033846.53790-1-changfengnan@bytedance.com/ > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20260819124341.4185621-1-lrizzo@google.com/ > Thanks for sharing these Michael. I'll check more on these, and try it out. Regards, Naman