On Thu, Jun 30, 2016 at 07:48:54PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Sat, Jun 25, 2016 at 10:05:19PM +0200, Alexander Gordeev wrote: > > > + * and generate an output cpumask suitable for spreading MSI/MSI-X vectors > > > + * so that they are distributed as good as possible around the CPUs. If > > > + * more vectors than CPUs are available we'll map one to each CPU, > > > > Unless I do not misinterpret a loop from msix_setup_entries() (patch 08/13), > > the above is incorrect: > > What part do you think is incorrect? With your explanations below and no immediate intention to fix the algorithm it is correct. > > (*) I guess, in some topology configurations a total number of all > > first siblings may be less than the number of vectors. > > Yes, in that case we'll assign imcompetely. I've already heard people > complaining about that at LSF/MM, but no one volunteered patches. > I only have devices with 1 or enough vectores to test, so I don't > really dare to touch the algorithm. Either way the algorithm > change should probably be a different patch than refactoring it and > moving it around. I see your approach now. Thanks! -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-block" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
