Hi Ming, Comments inline > -----Original Message----- > From: Ming Lei <ming.lei@xxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2021 9:17 AM > To: Saurav Kashyap <skashyap@xxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: Sagi Grimberg <sagi@xxxxxxxxxxx>; Nilesh Javali <njavali@xxxxxxxxxxx>; > martin.petersen@xxxxxxxxxx; linux-nvme@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux- > scsi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; GR-QLogic-Storage-Upstream <GR-QLogic-Storage- > Upstream@xxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: [EXT] Re: [PATCH 0/2] qla2xxx - add nvme map_queues support > > External Email > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 03:38:24AM +0000, Saurav Kashyap wrote: > > Hi Sagi, > > Comments inline > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Sagi Grimberg <sagi@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Sent: Monday, August 23, 2021 10:51 PM > > > To: Nilesh Javali <njavali@xxxxxxxxxxx>; martin.petersen@xxxxxxxxxx; > linux- > > > nvme@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Ming Lei <ming.lei@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > Cc: linux-scsi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; GR-QLogic-Storage-Upstream <GR-QLogic- > > > Storage-Upstream@xxxxxxxxxxx> > > > Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] qla2xxx - add nvme map_queues support > > > > > > > > > On 8/23/21 5:56 AM, Nilesh Javali wrote: > > > > Currently nvme fc doesn't support map queue functionality. This patch > > > > set adds map_queue functionality to nvme_fc_mq_ops and > > > > nvme_fc_port_template, providing an option to LLDs to map queues > > > > similar to SCSI. For qla2xxx, minimum 10% improvement is noticed > > > > with this change as it helps in reducing cpu thrashing. > > > > > > Does this make nvme-fc use managed irq? > > > > qla2xxx driver uses pci_alloc_irq_vectors_affinity to have affinity with each > MSI-X vector. Currently nvme queue are not mapped based on affinity and irq > offset. The change is to use blk_mq_pci_map_queues for mapping, this function > consider irq affinity as well as irq offset. > > > > OK, got it. Even though without this patchset, nvme-fc actually relies > on managed irq since qla2xxx driver uses pci_alloc_irq_vectors_affinity. > > Now the patchset[1] isn't good for addressing the issue in > blk_mq_alloc_request_hctx(). Can you please elaborate on this? Is there something needs to be done from my side? Thanks, ~Saurav > > [1] https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https- > 3A__lore.kernel.org_linux-2Dblock_YR7demOSG6MKFVAF-40T590_T_- > 23t&d=DwIBAg&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=ZHZbmY_LbM3DUZK_BDO1 > OITP3ot_Vkb_5w- > gas5TBMQ&m=CqFDnfAsZphubKXkUx5gsRF6RZ2Qe6sxWkYq4pBfFD0&s=2Nba > EUI5eB6_R6PxW8ld1Xn2OU3_UdD6D30uvFAWhow&e= > > > Thanks, > Ming
