Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1574991
| From | Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/6] genirq: allow assigning affinity to present but not online CPUs |
| Date | 2017-02-06 18:00 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <t7UNZ-7sP-25@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <t7yaK-1kO-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <t7yaK-1kO-13@gated-at.bofh.it> <t7yaK-1kO-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <t7yaK-1kO-9@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Sun, Feb 05, 2017 at 05:40:23PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > Hi Joe, > > On Fri, Feb 03, 2017 at 08:58:09PM -0500, Joe Korty wrote: > > IIRC, some years ago I ran across a customer system where > > the #cpus_present was twice as big as #cpus_possible. > > > > Hyperthreading was turned off in the BIOS so it was not > > entirely out of line for the extra cpus to be declared > > present, even though none of them would ever be available > > for use. > > This sounds like a system we should quirk around instead of optimizing > for it. Unless I totally misunderstand the idea behind cpu_possible > and cpu_present. Can we use the online CPUs and create a new hot-cpu notifier to the nvme driver to free/reallocate as needed? We were doing that before blk-mq. Now blk-mq can change the number hardware contexts on a live queue, so we can reintroduce that behavior to nvme and only allocate what we need.
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: [PATCH 1/6] genirq: allow assigning affinity to present but not online CPUs Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> - 2017-02-05 17:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH 1/6] genirq: allow assigning affinity to present but not online CPUs Keith Busch <keith.busch@intel.com> - 2017-02-06 18:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH 1/6] genirq: allow assigning affinity to present but not online CPUs Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> - 2017-02-06 18:10 +0100
csiph-web