[RFC PATCH 0/3] nvme-pci: dynamic interrupt moderation

[changfengnan]

> From: "Keith Busch"<kbusch at kernel.org>
> Date:  Wed, Oct 28, 2026, 23:15
> Subject:  Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] nvme-pci: dynamic interrupt moderation
> To: "Christoph Hellwig"<hch at lst.de>
> Cc: "Fengnan"<changfengnan at bytedance.com>, "Keith Busch"<kbusch at meta.com>, <linux-nvme at lists.infradead.org>, <linux-pci at vger.kernel.org>, <tglx at kernel.org>, <namjain at linux.microsoft.com>
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2026 at 04:07:12PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 22, 2026 at 05:43:54PM +0800, Fengnan wrote:
> > > Hi Keith:
> > > 
> > > I made some modifications to DIM and then implemented a solution
> > > using the DIM framework. 
> > > Based on current testing, the results are now comparable to those of
> > > the previous patch.
> > > Here are the preliminary test results:
> > > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1e8LQPnaDhmv50XlAM3XxI0TMQkhbk0bTZwlJP1Hzzdk/edit?gid=188992110#gid=188992110
> > > 
> > > If you agree with this approach, I’ll continue testing and optimizing.
> > 
> > І can't speak for Keith, but I'd really love to see this going forward!
> 
> Same! This is a great problem to solve, but I'm just sorry I don't have
> more cycles to work on the cause. I can quickly respin the msix noflush
> pre-patches to address the naming issues tglx mentioned, and we can take
> nvme in whichever direction has the best performance.
> 

That sounds good.
I'm currently working on continuously optimizing and testing both
approaches (using DIM and not using DIM). 
I plan to update the code and add new data again next Monday.

Thanks.