Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] nvme-pci: adaptive interrupt coalescing
Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | org.infradead.lists.linux-nvme,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Wed, Jul 22, 2026 at 10:22:11AM +0800, changfengnan wrote: > > > From: "Keith Busch"<[email protected]> > > Date: Tue, Jul 21, 2026, 23:11 > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] nvme-pci: adaptive interrupt coalescing > > To: "Fengnan Chang"<[email protected]> > > Cc: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]> > > On Tue, Jul 21, 2026 at 04:37:39PM +0800, Fengnan Chang wrote: > > > @@ -1618,6 +1748,8 @@ static inline bool nvme_poll_cq(struct nvme_queue *nvmeq, > > > * the cqe requires a full read memory barrier > > > */ > > > dma_rmb(); > > > + if (sq_head) > > > + *sq_head = le16_to_cpu(nvmeq->cqes[nvmeq->cq_head].sq_head); > > > > This is the wrong criteria to determine the outstanding depth. The spec > > allows the controller to move this forward after it has read an entry. > > The commands may still be in progress, so the depth of future > > completions to expect can't depend on this value. > > > > But in general, I agree with the spirit of where this is going. > > Thanks for your feedback. I’d like to hear more opinions from others. > If this is the right direction, I’ll continue to improve this patch. > > Hi Jens, Christoph, Sagi: > what do you think? Yes, this is a useful idea, please continue with it if you can.