From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from 009.lax.mailroute.net (009.lax.mailroute.net [199.89.1.12]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BBC0D15098C for ; Mon, 13 May 2024 13:12:53 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=199.89.1.12 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1715605975; cv=none; b=nv9M42D3yCO2IrNRqjmHmAunZ3racqu8rDibB3DChx0y64vSTpnyroJ32WvMUC2SyuJAod4Ja+7tl1cBXLbNDD058s11HfFSv7P5LKmc38l/aafSLPpMvbamI3Gq8FWy3foVFWXyAV5vREz5UAby68R5ZMntBB+ASOWAkU62om8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1715605975; c=relaxed/simple; bh=QIyA9kU3DXYufAzAbyQLvhbsunKTbVggA+xwxPHEB3k=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=slXWAwMjnvViNhWDDUh0sERcpe+/eslfFDG2V9BPKlPm7B53RXV9xNNMhF6hXww9tDWvQ2aBKHeLpqddfcYNwTMJfJ1yuh60p1o9FC25kPstUuf29pg0a0ZgoLkiT9eYM3d2BoJW/FQDFFWjE81lq33f52zA2V78Mj3lc2SA8ZM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=acm.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=acm.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=acm.org header.i=@acm.org header.b=apbCsBl0; arc=none smtp.client-ip=199.89.1.12 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=acm.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=acm.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=acm.org header.i=@acm.org header.b="apbCsBl0" Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by 009.lax.mailroute.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4VdKfR2Dh3zlgVnf; Mon, 13 May 2024 13:12:47 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=acm.org; h= content-transfer-encoding:content-type:content-type:in-reply-to :from:from:content-language:references:subject:subject :user-agent:mime-version:date:date:message-id:received:received; s=mr01; t=1715605964; x=1718197965; bh=CK/yTD4vsBE25iZLNTjIJQVN n6zNelLGLfVBPKfwaCQ=; b=apbCsBl00eKoh96TCJA+4gFfsHjvC2MCRzFnHNjt igYlO5msrwPg+wC8vWf1qPY/DOiw9OJ4Ky2aBN6iQ8/DCmz939vm4E0beYyLgbbX 0qRe61nDogYk5RF/Y9zTLl8X1WwMjAC7z7WaF/Vshag1ytEjhbot0pJ+8/y0qCZ0 S3/lr4lbr34hCcqJEIJNMv2f6C/or7FAFe9/q8n7JkknryhXufZdPyqFekY1u8CU DE+xlyblECb+NRNCPeBAKvAAPI4BbzsAOMBOa84Z7OJhwEuYHkB/llQubhJCys7Q ya4MzBzUFU5tdoxJyzCwQNtaAV1bzPN6Fcx3OHmauIuKzA== X-Virus-Scanned: by MailRoute Received: from 009.lax.mailroute.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (009.lax [127.0.0.1]) (mroute_mailscanner, port 10029) with LMTP id oJpwUKMiAjg5; Mon, 13 May 2024 13:12:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [172.20.0.79] (unknown [8.9.45.205]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: bvanassche@acm.org) by 009.lax.mailroute.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4VdKfM5rYNzlgVnW; Mon, 13 May 2024 13:12:43 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: Date: Mon, 13 May 2024 07:12:42 -0600 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: [PATCH 2/2] nvme-pci: allow unmanaged interrupts To: Christoph Hellwig , Keith Busch Cc: linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, ming.lei@redhat.com, Keith Busch References: <20240510141459.3207725-1-kbusch@meta.com> <20240510141459.3207725-2-kbusch@meta.com> <20240510151047.GA10486@lst.de> Content-Language: en-US From: Bart Van Assche In-Reply-To: <20240510151047.GA10486@lst.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 5/10/24 08:10, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 07:14:59AM -0700, Keith Busch wrote: >> From: Keith Busch >> >> Some people _really_ want to control their interrupt affinity. > > So let them argue why. I'd rather have a really, really, really > good argument for this crap, and I'd like to hear it from the horses > mouth. Performance can be increased by modifying the interrupt assignments carefully, especially in storage appliances that have to process a large number of network and storage interrupts. By carefully assigning interrupts the number of completions processed per interrupt can be increased and hence performance also increases. In 2014 I was working on a product that benefited from this approach. Thanks, Bart.