On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 10:23:28AM +0200, Sagi Grimberg wrote: > Christoph suggest to me once that we can take a hybrid > approach where we consume a small amount of completions (say 4) > right away from the interrupt handler and if we have more > we schedule irq-poll to reap the rest. But back then it > didn't work better which is not aligned with my observations > that we consume only 1 completion per interrupt... > > I can give it another go... What do people think about it? This could be good. What's also possible (see answer to my previous mail) is measuring the time it takes for a completion to arrive and if the average time is lower than the context switch time just busy loop insted of waiting for the IRQ to arrive. If it is higher we can always schedule a timer to hit _before_ the IRQ will likely arrive and start polling. Is this something that sounds reasonable to you guys as well? Johannes -- Johannes Thumshirn Storage jthumshirn@xxxxxxx +49 911 74053 689 SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) Key fingerprint = EC38 9CAB C2C4 F25D 8600 D0D0 0393 969D 2D76 0850 -- 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
