On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 12:30:27PM +, Song Bao Hua (Barry Song) wrote:
> Thanks for your comment. I had a patch with command line option as below.
> If it is what you prefer, I'd refine this one and send.
>
> [PATCH] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: permit users to disable msi polling
> ---
>
arm ;
> linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: disable MSI polling if SEV
> polling is faster
>
> On Fri, Jul 31, 2020 at 10:48:33AM +, Song Bao Hua (Barry Song) wrote:
> > > -Original Message-
> > > From: John Garry
>
mmu@lists.linux-foundation.org
> > Cc: Zengtao (B) ; Linuxarm
> > ; linux-arm-ker...@lists.infradead.org
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: disable MSI polling if SEV
> > polling is faster
> >
> > On 31/07/2020 09:33, Barry Song wrote:
> >
ead.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] iommu/arm-smmu-v3: disable MSI polling if SEV
> polling is faster
>
> On 31/07/2020 09:33, Barry Song wrote:
> > Different implementations may show different performance by using SEV
> > polling or MSI polling.
> > On the implementat
On 31/07/2020 09:33, Barry Song wrote:
Different implementations may show different performance by using SEV
polling or MSI polling.
On the implementation of hi1620, tests show disabling MSI polling can
bring performance improvement.
Using 16 threads to run netperf on hns3 100G NIC with UDP
