Re: [PATCH 10/13] irqchip/armada-370-xp: Fix reenabling last per-CPU interrupt

[Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>]

On Mon, Jul 29 2024 at 15:28, Marek Behún wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 28, 2024 at 11:47:30PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 15 2024 at 12:51, Marek Behún wrote:
>> > The number of per-CPU interrupts is 29 (0 to 28). This is described by
>> > the constant MPIC_MAX_PER_CPU_IRQS, set to 28 (the maximum per-CPU
>> > interrupt).
>> >
>> > Commit 0fa4ce746d1d ("irqchip/armada-370-xp: Re-enable per-CPU
>> > interrupts at resume time") used the constant incorrectly in the
>> > for-loop, it used the operator < instead of <=, causing it to iterate
>> > only the first 28 interrupts (0 to 27), ignoring the last, 28th,
>> > per-CPU interrupt.
>> >
>> > To avoid this kind of confusions, fix this issue by renaming the constant
>> > to MPIC_PER_CPU_IRQS_NR and set it to 29, the number of per-CPU IRQs.
>> > Update its use in mpic_is_percpu_irq() accordingly.
>> >
>> > Fixes: 0fa4ce746d1d ("irqchip/armada-370-xp: Re-enable per-CPU interrupts at resume time")
>> > Signed-off-by: Marek Behún <kabel@kernel.org>
>> 
>> Please don't hide fixes in the middle of a refactoring series. Split
>> them out and make sure that they can be applied w/o prerequisites so
>> they can be easily backported.
>
> Hi Thomas,
>
> but now that you applied my previous refactors to irq/core, even if I
> rebase the patch on top of those, it won't apply to stable kernels.
>
> I can either:
> - ignore this issue and post the patch alone as a fixes patch
> - rebase on top of v6.11-rc1 and send you updated version of patches
>   you already applied to irq/core
> - drop the Fixes tag (the 29th per-CPU interrupt is not used in any
>   real device-tree)

Drop the fixes tag then.