lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Jan]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC 1/2] softirq: Defer net rx/tx processing to ksoftirqd context
On Fri, Jan 12, 2018 at 06:23:08AM +0100, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-01-11 at 12:22 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 12:16 PM, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Note that when I implemented TCP Small queues, I did experiments between
> > > using a work queue or a tasklet, and workqueues added unacceptable P99
> > > latencies, when many user threads are competing with kernel threads.
> >
> > Yes.
> >
> > So I think one solution might be to have a hybrid system, where we do
> > the softirq's synchronously normally (which is what you really want
> > for good latency).
> >
> > But then fall down on a threaded model - but that fallback case should
> > be per-softirq, not global. So if one softirq uses a lot of CPU time,
> > that shouldn't affect the latency of other softirqs.
> >
> > So maybe we could get rid of the per-cpu ksoftirqd entirely, and
> > replace it with with per-cpu and per-softirq workqueues?
>
> How would that be better than what RT used to do, and I still do for my
> RT kernels via boot option, namely split ksoftirqd into per-softirq
> threads.

Workqueue are probably more simple. Unless you need to set specific prios
to your ksoftirqds? Not sure if that's tunable on workqueues.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-01-14 23:25    [W:0.173 / U:0.088 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site