On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 09:53:34AM +0200, Sven Auhagen wrote:
>
> I do not have access to a numa node inside the inside secure
> driver and can only use -1 as the cpumask_local_spread numa node.
> Is that what you are looking for?
Yes, at least it won't be giving us CPUs that are off-line.
Cheers
> -Original Message-
> From: Sven Auhagen
> Sent: Friday, July 17, 2020 9:54 AM
> To: Herbert Xu
> Cc: Van Leeuwen, Pascal ; linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] inside-secure irq balance
>
> <<< External Email >>>
> On Fri,
On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 04:57:38PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 08:35:04AM +0200, Sven Auhagen wrote:
> >
> > I disagree as this is common practice among other kernel drivers
> > like ethernet.
> > Also this is also beeing done in other crypto drivers not to say
> > that the s
On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 08:35:04AM +0200, Sven Auhagen wrote:
>
> I disagree as this is common practice among other kernel drivers
> like ethernet.
> Also this is also beeing done in other crypto drivers not to say
> that the speed improvements are pretty significant.
>
> irqbalance can of course
On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 03:20:50PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 07:01:34AM +0200, Sven Auhagen wrote:
> >
> > Alright, that makes sense, thank you.
> >
> > As I said in my second email yesterday, it is just a hint and not binding.
> > I run some tests and here is what happens
On Fri, Jul 17, 2020 at 07:01:34AM +0200, Sven Auhagen wrote:
>
> Alright, that makes sense, thank you.
>
> As I said in my second email yesterday, it is just a hint and not binding.
> I run some tests and here is what happens when I disable CPU3 on my 4 Core
> MCBin:
I don't think we should be
On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 10:04:20PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 11:21:36AM +0200, Sven Auhagen wrote:
> >
> > You are correct, let me have a look at how to get the cpu bit correctly.
> > Well everything runs on the first CPU now, what do you do if that does down
> > or up?
>
On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 11:21:36AM +0200, Sven Auhagen wrote:
>
> You are correct, let me have a look at how to get the cpu bit correctly.
> Well everything runs on the first CPU now, what do you do if that does down
> or up?
> I think there is no mechanism in general at the moment for the current
ypto@vger.kernel.org
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] inside-secure irq balance
> >
> > <<< External Email >>>
> > Sven Auhagen wrote:
> > >
> > > + // Set affinity
> > > + cpu = ring_id % num_online_cpus();
> > > +
ypto@vger.kernel.org
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] inside-secure irq balance
> >
> > <<< External Email >>>
> > Sven Auhagen wrote:
> > >
> > > + // Set affinity
> > > + cpu = ring_id % num_online_cpus();
> > > +
> -Original Message-
> From: linux-crypto-ow...@vger.kernel.org
> On Behalf Of Herbert Xu
> Sent: Thursday, July 16, 2020 9:22 AM
> To: Sven Auhagen
> Cc: linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] inside-secure irq balance
>
> <<< Exte
Sven Auhagen wrote:
>
> + // Set affinity
> + cpu = ring_id % num_online_cpus();
> + irq_set_affinity_hint(irq, get_cpu_mask(cpu));
> +
This doesn't look right. There is no guarantee that the online
CPUs are the lowest bits in the bitmask. Also, what are you going
to do when t
12 matches
Mail list logo
