All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, John <jw@nuclearfallout.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] irq: revert non-working patch to affinity defaults
Date: Fri, 3 Apr 2015 17:13:36 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150403171336.000075f2@unknown> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150403065557.GA12815@gmail.com>

On Fri, 3 Apr 2015 08:55:57 +0200
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:
> So the original commit also has the problem that it unnecessary 
> drops/retakes the descriptor lock:
> 
> >  	irq_put_desc_unlock(desc, flags);
> > -	/* set the initial affinity to prevent every interrupt being on CPU0 */
> > -	if (m)
> > -		__irq_set_affinity(irq, m, false);
> 
> 
> i.e. why not just call into irq_set_affinity_locked() while we still 
> have the descriptor locked?

I had tried that but it didn't help much.  I also tried kzalloc a new
descriptor like the proc functionality does, and that changes the
behavior a little, but doesn't fix it AFAICS.
 
> Now this is just a small annoyance that should not really matter - it 
> would be nice to figure out the real reason for why the irqs move back 
> to CPU#0.
> 
> In theory the same could happen to 'irqbalanced' as well, if it calls 
> shortly after an irq was registered - so this is not a bug we want to 
> ignore.

Let me know if I can do something to help, the IRQ code is a bit of a
steep learning curve, so the chances of me fixing it are small.
 
> Also, worst case we are back to where v3.19 was, right? So could we 
> try to analyze this a bit more?

Yes, 3.19 shipped with this issue.  Again, let me know if I can help.

Thanks,
 Jesse

  reply	other threads:[~2015-04-04  0:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-04-03  0:50 [PATCH] irq: revert non-working patch to affinity defaults Jesse Brandeburg
2015-04-03  6:55 ` Ingo Molnar
2015-04-04  0:13   ` Jesse Brandeburg [this message]
2015-04-04  9:34     ` Ingo Molnar
2015-04-04  9:51       ` John

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20150403171336.000075f2@unknown \
    --to=jesse.brandeburg@intel.com \
    --cc=jw@nuclearfallout.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.