Re: [net-next 02/11] igb: Use node specific allocations for the q_vectors and rings
flat view
From: Alexander Duyck <hidden>
Date: 2011-10-10 16:14:53
On 10/08/2011 12:51 PM, David Miller wrote:
From: Jeff Kirsher <redacted> Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 23:47:32 -0700quoted
From: Alexander Duyck <redacted> This change is meant to update the ring and vector allocations so that they are per node instead of allocating everything on the node that ifconfig/modprobe is called on. By doing this we can cut down significantly on cross node traffic. Signed-off-by: Alexander Duyck <redacted> Tested-by: Aaron Brown <redacted> Signed-off-by: Jeff Kirsher <redacted>adapter->node seems superfluous. It's always "-1" when we enter the allocation functions, and we always restore it to it's original value upon exit from such functions. Just get rid of it and use a local variable in these functions to keep track of the current allocation node. Also, what ensures that MSI-X interrupts are targetted to a cpu on the the node where you've made these allocations? I was pretty sure Ben Hutchings added infrastructure that's usable to ensure this, but I can't see where you're using it.
Actually the main reason for having adapter->node is because in our out-of-tree driver we end up using it as a module parameter in the event that someone is running in single queue mode and wants to split up the ports between nodes. As such I would prefer to keep the parameter around and just default it to -1 as I am currently doing. However if it must go I guess I can work around that sync-up issue. In this case we don't have any guarantee other than the fact that most people when trying to get performance will arrange their IRQs in a round robin fashion. However this approach is still preferred over just allocating all of the rings on one node and incurring the possible overhead for all of the access being primarily on a single node. The igb implementation doesn't have the code in place yet for the irq affinity hints. It is one of the few things remaining for me to sync up between igb and ixgbe, however it is on my list of things to do. Thanks, Alex