From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list linux-mips); Thu, 14 May 2009 14:20:52 +0100 (BST) Received: from elvis.franken.de ([193.175.24.41]:39132 "EHLO elvis.franken.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by ftp.linux-mips.org with ESMTP id S20023446AbZENNUp (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 May 2009 14:20:45 +0100 Received: from uucp (helo=solo.franken.de) by elvis.franken.de with local-bsmtp (Exim 3.36 #1) id 1M4arb-0000RN-00; Thu, 14 May 2009 15:20:43 +0200 Received: by solo.franken.de (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 942DDC21C7; Thu, 14 May 2009 15:20:30 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 15:20:30 +0200 From: Thomas Bogendoerfer To: Martin Michlmayr Cc: linux-mips@linux-mips.org, ralf@linux-mips.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] SIBYTE: fix locking in set_irq_affinity Message-ID: <20090514132030.GA7926@alpha.franken.de> References: <20090504215155.461B2E31C1@solo.franken.de> <20090512215556.GA4774@deprecation.cyrius.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090512215556.GA4774@deprecation.cyrius.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Return-Path: X-Envelope-To: <"|/home/ecartis/ecartis -s linux-mips"> (uid 0) X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org Original-Recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org X-archive-position: 22715 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org Errors-to: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org X-original-sender: tsbogend@alpha.franken.de Precedence: bulk X-list: linux-mips On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 11:55:57PM +0200, Martin Michlmayr wrote: > * Thomas Bogendoerfer [2009-05-04 23:51]: > > Locking of irq_desc is now done in irq_set_affinity; Don't lock it > > again in chip specific set_affinity function. > > SWARM boots with this patch, but dmesg shows: > > [17179570.260000] attempted to set irq affinity for irq 8 to multiple CPUs > [17179570.484000] attempted to set irq affinity for irq 8 to multiple CPUs > [17179570.500000] attempted to set irq affinity for irq 8 to multiple CPUs I saw them as well, either the caller of set_irq_affinity does something illegal or the API has changed and the message just should go away... Thomas. -- Crap can work. Given enough thrust pigs will fly, but it's not necessary a good idea. [ RFC1925, 2.3 ]