On 5/15/2018 11:07 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 09:53:57AM -0400, Adam Wallis wrote: > Does this really do anything? Given the speed of USB3 at the moment, > does fixing the memory to the node the PCI device is on show any > measurable speedups? Last I remember about NUMA systems, it wasn't > always a win depending on where the irq came in from, right? > > thanks, > > greg k-h > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > I was getting really inconsistent throughput speeds on a system I was testing with NUMA nodes. Using an SMMU in identity mode, I was able to track down where the performance deltas were coming from...Some of the rings were going to the "wrong" node. Yes, it's possible to handle your IRQs with CPUs on the wrong NUMA node...but I would argue that it's always best to have the rings for USB controller X as close to controller X if possible. Users can then properly constrain IRQs, and even kernel threads to the right Domain if they so desire. After setting the IRQ affinity to the right node AND applying this patch, I started getting much more reliable (and faster) results. -- Adam Wallis Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies as an affiliate of Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux Foundation Collaborative Project. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
