On 09/08/14 16:27, Sreedhar Kodali wrote:
Thanks for your insights. Your suggestion of having a separate vector per process is really useful when multiple processes are simultaneously running in the same environment. At the implementation level this requires an extended configuration file format. Can't we possibly think of this as a next iteration?
This patch introduces a new configuration file (/etc/rdma/rsocket/comp_vector). User expect that such configuration files remain supported after a software upgrade. In other words, introduction of a new configuration file deserves careful consideration. Do we really need this new configuration file ? Why not e.g. to change the default behavior of the rsockets library into spreading the interrupt processing workload over all completion vectors supported by the HCA ? Furthermore, the number of completion vectors that is supported by an HCA not only depends on the HCA firmware but also on the number of completion vectors a HCA could allocate during driver initialization. The number of MSI-X vectors available on an x86-64 system is limited (224). Dual-socket x86-64 motherboards with up to 11 PCIe slots are available commercially. If all PCIe-slots are populated it's almost sure that one of the PCIe cards won't be assigned as many MSI-X vectors as it could use.
Sorry but I'm not convinced that using the same completion vector mask for all HCA's and all processes is a good idea. Or is there perhaps something I have overlooked ?
Bart. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
