From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-7.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,NICE_REPLY_A,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBBF2C63777 for ; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 07:30:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5CE8D20B80 for ; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 07:30:20 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="fA9CICIb" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726930AbgKYHaT (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Nov 2020 02:30:19 -0500 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([216.205.24.124]:27128 "EHLO us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725308AbgKYHaT (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Nov 2020 02:30:19 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1606289418; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=D3DSrYj+gqE7fmTGGcLGiNd0q/oeDN1ODN+0Xluwkpc=; b=fA9CICIbgyXjS69Z6vTqpHdS8ITgmWbSy2XevqJNelZW0fnX01zkFd1otHTyJbgcFiWQa0 o5KhkAO4dXq4epX5JilmW9dDm2dDIbJjeHGvVCVVQWDkCtFyTFtKZYlO6sJR1eMeGsd5C9 k6a0pf1GjYFKCvot8A3oovlTcwkLyds= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-411-HGAXgTQcP7C0r00a5_OLvQ-1; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 02:30:15 -0500 X-MC-Unique: HGAXgTQcP7C0r00a5_OLvQ-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx07.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 161A618C89E0; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 07:30:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.36.113.83] (ovpn-113-83.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.113.83]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDFAF10023B0; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 07:30:06 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] genirq: add an affinity parameter to irq_create_mapping() To: Thomas Gleixner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Paul Mackerras , Benjamin Herrenschmidt , Michael Ellerman , linux-block@vger.kernel.org, "Michael S . Tsirkin" , Marc Zyngier , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org, Christoph Hellwig References: <20201124200308.1110744-1-lvivier@redhat.com> <20201124200308.1110744-2-lvivier@redhat.com> <87h7pel7ng.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> From: Laurent Vivier Message-ID: <8e9002d0-086f-1e7d-4b94-45b6d49f7917@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 08:30:05 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87h7pel7ng.fsf@nanos.tec.linutronix.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.22 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 24/11/2020 23:19, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > On Tue, Nov 24 2020 at 21:03, Laurent Vivier wrote: >> This parameter is needed to pass it to irq_domain_alloc_descs(). >> >> This seems to have been missed by >> o06ee6d571f0e ("genirq: Add affinity hint to irq allocation") > > No, this has not been missed at all. There was and is no reason to do > this. > >> This is needed to implement proper support for multiqueue with >> pseries. > > And because pseries needs this _all_ callers need to be changed? > >> 123 files changed, 171 insertions(+), 146 deletions(-) > > Lots of churn for nothing. 99% of the callers will never need that. > > What's wrong with simply adding an interface which takes that parameter, > make the existing one an inline wrapper and and leave the rest alone? Nothing. I'm going to do like that. Thank you for your comment. Laurent