Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

Ming, On Fri, 30 Mar 2018, Ming Lei wrote: > On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 04:08:19PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > Thoughts? > > Given this patchset doesn't have effect on normal machines without > supporting physical CPU hotplug, it can fix performance regression on > machines which might

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

Ming, On Fri, 30 Mar 2018, Ming Lei wrote: > On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 04:08:19PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > Thoughts? > > Given this patchset doesn't have effect on normal machines without > supporting physical CPU hotplug, it can fix performance regression on > machines which might

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

Hi Thomas, On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 04:08:19PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Fri, 9 Mar 2018, Ming Lei wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 11:08:54AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > > > So my understanding is that these irq patches are enhancements and > > > > > not bug > > > > > fixes.

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

Hi Thomas, On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 04:08:19PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Fri, 9 Mar 2018, Ming Lei wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 11:08:54AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > > > So my understanding is that these irq patches are enhancements and > > > > > not bug > > > > > fixes.

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

On Mon, 2018-03-26 at 10:39 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Lo! Your friendly Linux regression tracker here ;-) > > On 08.03.2018 14:18, Artem Bityutskiy wrote: > > On Thu, 2018-03-08 at 18:53 +0800, Ming Lei wrote: > > > This patchset tries to spread among online CPUs as far as possible, so >

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

On Mon, 2018-03-26 at 10:39 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Lo! Your friendly Linux regression tracker here ;-) > > On 08.03.2018 14:18, Artem Bityutskiy wrote: > > On Thu, 2018-03-08 at 18:53 +0800, Ming Lei wrote: > > > This patchset tries to spread among online CPUs as far as possible, so >

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

Lo! Your friendly Linux regression tracker here ;-) On 08.03.2018 14:18, Artem Bityutskiy wrote: > On Thu, 2018-03-08 at 18:53 +0800, Ming Lei wrote: >> This patchset tries to spread among online CPUs as far as possible, so >> that we can avoid to allocate too less irq vectors with online CPUs >>

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

Lo! Your friendly Linux regression tracker here ;-) On 08.03.2018 14:18, Artem Bityutskiy wrote: > On Thu, 2018-03-08 at 18:53 +0800, Ming Lei wrote: >> This patchset tries to spread among online CPUs as far as possible, so >> that we can avoid to allocate too less irq vectors with online CPUs >>

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

Hi Artern, At 03/14/2018 05:07 PM, Artem Bityutskiy wrote: On Wed, 2018-03-14 at 12:11 +0800, Dou Liyang wrote: At 03/13/2018 05:35 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 9:39 AM, Artem Bityutskiy Longer term, yeah, I agree. Kernel's notion of possible CPU count should be

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

Hi Artern, At 03/14/2018 05:07 PM, Artem Bityutskiy wrote: On Wed, 2018-03-14 at 12:11 +0800, Dou Liyang wrote: At 03/13/2018 05:35 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 9:39 AM, Artem Bityutskiy Longer term, yeah, I agree. Kernel's notion of possible CPU count should be

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

On Wed, 2018-03-14 at 12:11 +0800, Dou Liyang wrote: > > At 03/13/2018 05:35 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 9:39 AM, Artem Bityutskiy > > > > Longer term, yeah, I agree. Kernel's notion of possible CPU > > > > count > > > > should be realistic. > > > > I did a patch

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

On Wed, 2018-03-14 at 12:11 +0800, Dou Liyang wrote: > > At 03/13/2018 05:35 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 9:39 AM, Artem Bityutskiy > > > > Longer term, yeah, I agree. Kernel's notion of possible CPU > > > > count > > > > should be realistic. > > > > I did a patch

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

Hi Artem, At 03/14/2018 11:29 AM, Dou Liyang wrote: Hi All, At 03/13/2018 05:35 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 9:39 AM, Artem Bityutskiy wrote: On Tue, 2018-03-13 at 16:35 +0800, Ming Lei wrote: Then looks this issue need to fix by making possible

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

Hi Artem, At 03/14/2018 11:29 AM, Dou Liyang wrote: Hi All, At 03/13/2018 05:35 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 9:39 AM, Artem Bityutskiy wrote: On Tue, 2018-03-13 at 16:35 +0800, Ming Lei wrote: Then looks this issue need to fix by making possible CPU count accurate

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

Hi Rafael, Thank you so much for your reply. At 03/13/2018 05:25 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 4:11 AM, Dou Liyang wrote: Hi Thomas, At 03/09/2018 11:08 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: [...] I'm not sure if there is a clear indicator whether

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

Hi Rafael, Thank you so much for your reply. At 03/13/2018 05:25 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 4:11 AM, Dou Liyang wrote: Hi Thomas, At 03/09/2018 11:08 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: [...] I'm not sure if there is a clear indicator whether physcial hotplug is

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

Hi All, At 03/13/2018 05:35 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 9:39 AM, Artem Bityutskiy wrote: On Tue, 2018-03-13 at 16:35 +0800, Ming Lei wrote: Then looks this issue need to fix by making possible CPU count accurate because there are other resources

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

Hi All, At 03/13/2018 05:35 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 9:39 AM, Artem Bityutskiy wrote: On Tue, 2018-03-13 at 16:35 +0800, Ming Lei wrote: Then looks this issue need to fix by making possible CPU count accurate because there are other resources allocated according

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 9:39 AM, Artem Bityutskiy wrote: > On Tue, 2018-03-13 at 16:35 +0800, Ming Lei wrote: >> Then looks this issue need to fix by making possible CPU count >> accurate >> because there are other resources allocated according to >> num_possible_cpus(), >>

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 9:39 AM, Artem Bityutskiy wrote: > On Tue, 2018-03-13 at 16:35 +0800, Ming Lei wrote: >> Then looks this issue need to fix by making possible CPU count >> accurate >> because there are other resources allocated according to >> num_possible_cpus(), >> such as percpu

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 4:11 AM, Dou Liyang wrote: > Hi Thomas, > > At 03/09/2018 11:08 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > [...] >> >> >> I'm not sure if there is a clear indicator whether physcial hotplug is >> supported or not, but the ACPI folks (x86) and architecture

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 4:11 AM, Dou Liyang wrote: > Hi Thomas, > > At 03/09/2018 11:08 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > [...] >> >> >> I'm not sure if there is a clear indicator whether physcial hotplug is >> supported or not, but the ACPI folks (x86) and architecture maintainers > > +cc Rafael > >>

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

On Tue, 2018-03-13 at 16:35 +0800, Ming Lei wrote: > Then looks this issue need to fix by making possible CPU count > accurate > because there are other resources allocated according to > num_possible_cpus(), > such as percpu variables. Short term the regression should be fixed. It is already

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

On Tue, 2018-03-13 at 16:35 +0800, Ming Lei wrote: > Then looks this issue need to fix by making possible CPU count > accurate > because there are other resources allocated according to > num_possible_cpus(), > such as percpu variables. Short term the regression should be fixed. It is already

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 09:38:41AM +0200, Artem Bityutskiy wrote: > On Tue, 2018-03-13 at 11:11 +0800, Dou Liyang wrote: > > I also > > met the situation that BIOS told to ACPI that it could support > > physical > > CPUs hotplug, But actually, there was no hardware slots in the > > machine. > >

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 09:38:41AM +0200, Artem Bityutskiy wrote: > On Tue, 2018-03-13 at 11:11 +0800, Dou Liyang wrote: > > I also > > met the situation that BIOS told to ACPI that it could support > > physical > > CPUs hotplug, But actually, there was no hardware slots in the > > machine. > >

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

On Tue, 2018-03-13 at 11:11 +0800, Dou Liyang wrote: > I also > met the situation that BIOS told to ACPI that it could support > physical > CPUs hotplug, But actually, there was no hardware slots in the > machine. > the ACPI tables like user inputs which should be validated when we > use. This

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

On Tue, 2018-03-13 at 11:11 +0800, Dou Liyang wrote: > I also > met the situation that BIOS told to ACPI that it could support > physical > CPUs hotplug, But actually, there was no hardware slots in the > machine. > the ACPI tables like user inputs which should be validated when we > use. This

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

Hi Thomas, At 03/09/2018 11:08 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: [...] I'm not sure if there is a clear indicator whether physcial hotplug is supported or not, but the ACPI folks (x86) and architecture maintainers +cc Rafael should be able to answer that question. I have a machine which says:

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

Hi Thomas, At 03/09/2018 11:08 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote: [...] I'm not sure if there is a clear indicator whether physcial hotplug is supported or not, but the ACPI folks (x86) and architecture maintainers +cc Rafael should be able to answer that question. I have a machine which says:

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

On Fri, 9 Mar 2018, Ming Lei wrote: > On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 11:08:54AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > > So my understanding is that these irq patches are enhancements and not > > > > bug > > > > fixes. I'll queue them for 4.17 then. > > > > > > Wrt. this IO hang issue, these patches

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

On Fri, 9 Mar 2018, Ming Lei wrote: > On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 11:08:54AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > > So my understanding is that these irq patches are enhancements and not > > > > bug > > > > fixes. I'll queue them for 4.17 then. > > > > > > Wrt. this IO hang issue, these patches

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 11:08:54AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Fri, 9 Mar 2018, Ming Lei wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 12:20:09AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > On Thu, 8 Mar 2018, Ming Lei wrote: > > > > Actually, it isn't a real fix, the real one is in the following two: > > > >

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 11:08:54AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Fri, 9 Mar 2018, Ming Lei wrote: > > On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 12:20:09AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > On Thu, 8 Mar 2018, Ming Lei wrote: > > > > Actually, it isn't a real fix, the real one is in the following two: > > > >

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

On Fri, 9 Mar 2018, Ming Lei wrote: > On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 12:20:09AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > On Thu, 8 Mar 2018, Ming Lei wrote: > > > Actually, it isn't a real fix, the real one is in the following two: > > > > > > 0c20244d458e scsi: megaraid_sas: fix selection of reply queue > >

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

On Fri, 9 Mar 2018, Ming Lei wrote: > On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 12:20:09AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > On Thu, 8 Mar 2018, Ming Lei wrote: > > > Actually, it isn't a real fix, the real one is in the following two: > > > > > > 0c20244d458e scsi: megaraid_sas: fix selection of reply queue > >

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 09:00:08AM +0200, Artem Bityutskiy wrote: > On Fri, 2018-03-09 at 09:24 +0800, Ming Lei wrote: > > Hi Thomas, > > > > On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 12:20:09AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > On Thu, 8 Mar 2018, Ming Lei wrote: > > > > Actually, it isn't a real fix, the real

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 09:00:08AM +0200, Artem Bityutskiy wrote: > On Fri, 2018-03-09 at 09:24 +0800, Ming Lei wrote: > > Hi Thomas, > > > > On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 12:20:09AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > On Thu, 8 Mar 2018, Ming Lei wrote: > > > > Actually, it isn't a real fix, the real

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

On Fri, 2018-03-09 at 09:24 +0800, Ming Lei wrote: > Hi Thomas, > > On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 12:20:09AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > On Thu, 8 Mar 2018, Ming Lei wrote: > > > Actually, it isn't a real fix, the real one is in the following > > > two: > > > > > > 0c20244d458e scsi:

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

On Fri, 2018-03-09 at 09:24 +0800, Ming Lei wrote: > Hi Thomas, > > On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 12:20:09AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > On Thu, 8 Mar 2018, Ming Lei wrote: > > > Actually, it isn't a real fix, the real one is in the following > > > two: > > > > > > 0c20244d458e scsi:

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

Hi Thomas, On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 12:20:09AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Thu, 8 Mar 2018, Ming Lei wrote: > > Actually, it isn't a real fix, the real one is in the following two: > > > > 0c20244d458e scsi: megaraid_sas: fix selection of reply queue > > ed6d043be8cd scsi: hpsa:

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

Hi Thomas, On Fri, Mar 09, 2018 at 12:20:09AM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Thu, 8 Mar 2018, Ming Lei wrote: > > Actually, it isn't a real fix, the real one is in the following two: > > > > 0c20244d458e scsi: megaraid_sas: fix selection of reply queue > > ed6d043be8cd scsi: hpsa:

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

On Thu, 8 Mar 2018, Ming Lei wrote: > Actually, it isn't a real fix, the real one is in the following two: > > 0c20244d458e scsi: megaraid_sas: fix selection of reply queue > ed6d043be8cd scsi: hpsa: fix selection of reply queue Where are these commits? Neither Linus tree not -next

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

On Thu, 8 Mar 2018, Ming Lei wrote: > Actually, it isn't a real fix, the real one is in the following two: > > 0c20244d458e scsi: megaraid_sas: fix selection of reply queue > ed6d043be8cd scsi: hpsa: fix selection of reply queue Where are these commits? Neither Linus tree not -next

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 03:18:33PM +0200, Artem Bityutskiy wrote: > On Thu, 2018-03-08 at 18:53 +0800, Ming Lei wrote: > > Hi, > > > > This patchset tries to spread among online CPUs as far as possible, so > > that we can avoid to allocate too less irq vectors with online CPUs > > mapped. > > >

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 03:18:33PM +0200, Artem Bityutskiy wrote: > On Thu, 2018-03-08 at 18:53 +0800, Ming Lei wrote: > > Hi, > > > > This patchset tries to spread among online CPUs as far as possible, so > > that we can avoid to allocate too less irq vectors with online CPUs > > mapped. > > >

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

On Thu, 2018-03-08 at 15:18 +0200, Artem Bityutskiy wrote: > Tested-by: Artem Bityutskiy > Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/1519311270.2535.53.ca...@intel.com And for completeness: Linux-Regression-ID: lr#15a115

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

On Thu, 2018-03-08 at 15:18 +0200, Artem Bityutskiy wrote: > Tested-by: Artem Bityutskiy > Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/1519311270.2535.53.ca...@intel.com And for completeness: Linux-Regression-ID: lr#15a115

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

On Thu, 2018-03-08 at 18:53 +0800, Ming Lei wrote: > Hi, > > This patchset tries to spread among online CPUs as far as possible, so > that we can avoid to allocate too less irq vectors with online CPUs > mapped. > > For example, in a 8cores system, 4 cpu cores(4~7) are offline/non present, > on

Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

On Thu, 2018-03-08 at 18:53 +0800, Ming Lei wrote: > Hi, > > This patchset tries to spread among online CPUs as far as possible, so > that we can avoid to allocate too less irq vectors with online CPUs > mapped. > > For example, in a 8cores system, 4 cpu cores(4~7) are offline/non present, > on

[PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

Hi, This patchset tries to spread among online CPUs as far as possible, so that we can avoid to allocate too less irq vectors with online CPUs mapped. For example, in a 8cores system, 4 cpu cores(4~7) are offline/non present, on a device with 4 queues: 1) before this patchset irq 39,

[PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online CPUs as far as possible

Hi, This patchset tries to spread among online CPUs as far as possible, so that we can avoid to allocate too less irq vectors with online CPUs mapped. For example, in a 8cores system, 4 cpu cores(4~7) are offline/non present, on a device with 4 queues: 1) before this patchset irq 39,