From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Thu Oct 1 10:28:50 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86ED6423CBF for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2020 10:28:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from hps@selasky.org) Received: from mail.turbocat.net (turbocat.net [88.99.82.50]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C28VT5Dddz3gFr for ; Thu, 1 Oct 2020 10:28:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from hps@selasky.org) Received: from hps2020.home.selasky.org (unknown [178.17.145.105]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail.turbocat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A3307260187; Thu, 1 Oct 2020 12:28:47 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Re: mlx5 irq To: =?UTF-8?Q?Michal_Van=c4=8do?= , freebsd-net@freebsd.org References: <0aa09fcc-dfcc-005e-8834-2a758ba6a03f@microwave.sk> <94978a05-94c6-cc55-229c-5a3c5352b29a@selasky.org> <3c64095f-8a45-0fb4-4835-7486bbd84663@microwave.sk> From: Hans Petter Selasky Message-ID: <32dbe3be-4b0a-6a94-d368-c5943d688bc6@selasky.org> Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2020 12:28:11 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.10.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <3c64095f-8a45-0fb4-4835-7486bbd84663@microwave.sk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4C28VT5Dddz3gFr X-Spamd-Bar: -- Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of hps@selasky.org designates 88.99.82.50 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=hps@selasky.org X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-2.70 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+a:mail.turbocat.net:c]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[selasky.org]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.97)[-0.969]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.40)[-0.403]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.02)[-1.024]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:24940, ipnet:88.99.0.0/16, country:DE]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; MAILMAN_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-net] X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.33 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 Oct 2020 10:28:50 -0000 On 2020-10-01 11:13, Michal Vančo via freebsd-net wrote: > On 01/10/2020 10:52, Hans Petter Selasky wrote: >> On 2020-10-01 10:24, Michal Vančo wrote: >>> But why is the actual number of IRQ lines bigger than number of CPU >>> cores? >> >> There are some dedicated IRQ's used for firmware management. >> >> Else the driver will use the number of online CPU's by default as the >> number of rings, if the hardware supports it. > > Thanks for clarification. Is there any way to optimize this? In my case > I have 2 CPU sockets with 8 cores each (SMT is disabled). NIC is > connected via PCIe to the first CPU socket (numa domain 0). In this > case, wouldn't it be better if all interrupts were firing only on cores > of first socket? > Hi, You can use "cpuset" to bind those IRQ threads to the right core. There is no automatic way :-) --HPS