> How about adding blk-iopoll support in ib_srp ? blk-iopoll is the NAPI
> equivalent for block devices. More information about blk-iopoll can be
> found here: http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/8/6/395.
Wow, I was not aware of that work at all. Thanks for the pointer.
Anyway, yes, that does look l
On Wed, Aug 4, 2010 at 10:40 PM, Roland Dreier wrote:
>
> > I believe this is a wrong approach for this problem. You are
> > workarounding it, not solving, and introducing a bad side effect of
> > additional context switch per command, so increasing its processing
> > latency. It doesn't matte
> I believe this is a wrong approach for this problem. You are
> workarounding it, not solving, and introducing a bad side effect of
> additional context switch per command, so increasing its processing
> latency. It doesn't matter that it can be switched off. Linux already
> has too many magi
Bart Van Assche, on 08/03/2010 06:02 PM wrote:
SRP I/O with small block sizes causes a high CPU load. Processing IB
completions on the context of a kernel thread instead of in interrupt context
allows to process up to 25% more I/O operations per second. This patch does
add a kernel parameter 'thr
SRP I/O with small block sizes causes a high CPU load. Processing IB
completions on the context of a kernel thread instead of in interrupt context
allows to process up to 25% more I/O operations per second. This patch does
add a kernel parameter 'thread' that allows to specify whether to process IB
