From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [193.142.43.55]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AA28A1429B; Sun, 7 Jul 2024 18:47:41 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1720378063; cv=none; b=XofPW/LIKbbjWncmMqKCUDOaPqN/g6RpIGulw+IzVfLjOpfdYwNlLzT8pbtL4yem0qtOPb5qxk/iOuzugHBFMW6Z25vHfb7R5wFdC1BpcVKmei5K4yMm+JjZoYK7s+0VA1nLLMxBoEjyi/MeeysFIH+UbR5r1vWYGjCPejeu0oE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1720378063; c=relaxed/simple; bh=v4h9od8K6fTONBvJosxZ6rQ5SiZd8ic36+1lPp+yduY=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=azcXFxQZZLXdE7fsUVp6VelAfh/mekOE8o/LJMFzNV0FEtzsJXMASE8nEYZjGDo3MCKMiF2zq8CTLFTr64dKdxm1kpmPL1LssEZLhrA0q9F5kAUHAogyfCxJOGbw+gZknHFYzGqbs8udzNNV8e5oUy1mc5FnUzP1A7P5DJhsDPM= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=sDntQ3FT; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=JtoKb1ia; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="sDntQ3FT"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="JtoKb1ia" From: Thomas Gleixner DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1720378060; 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: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=SGabcz1S+/3HqptjW5xYki+/7SJtSmlNFb9FyOSKDUs=; b=sDntQ3FTjBt3eqSfX9DOeKBLbWiEr+G0N8R9bFsC7b3yyC9uBFA0P29rjHuOAOGIb3mYJh qTzhMlrTglYzexCJN6YwleyNY/QZAKlpwNEb2z9Sr7BJqcEOuOQYGGSzYe3fb7ZQ7IqBwo FpxawuqQoLg/Sp+wV86NdU9LUonvNM/Qze0SUeHGSbJ94vzd69EVaJ+F3Bxtm0bcnC6h2y pJJ/WZktD0ulVwFUkQo4T7pPY2Lg7zlv+uaBmCAe9QHjsHks9E9o44nFhiNgRbOKYLBGx1 crPZLMQOsVxUdbdZpxUTAV4bhNFcQmv2qP47sx7dYAi1lmgE5o6PBFNxEB/EAw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1720378060; 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: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=SGabcz1S+/3HqptjW5xYki+/7SJtSmlNFb9FyOSKDUs=; b=JtoKb1ia/90BOJcqkbEkYho7f3FcH2fphFta2N3Ws6G9dtZSOuVEBx8ripsCgGZDQKnp7R SHRu789wnTetbFBA== To: Marek Vasut , linux-pci@vger.kernel.org Cc: Marek Vasut , Krzysztof =?utf-8?Q?Wil?= =?utf-8?Q?czy=C5=84ski?= , Bjorn Helgaas , Jisheng Zhang , Jon Hunter , Lorenzo Pieralisi , Marc Zyngier , Rob Herring , Yoshihiro Shimoda , linux-renesas-soc@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RFC] genirq/cpuhotplug, PCI/rcar-host: Silence set affinity failed warning In-Reply-To: <20240706132758.53298-1-marek.vasut+renesas@mailbox.org> References: <20240706132758.53298-1-marek.vasut+renesas@mailbox.org> Date: Sun, 07 Jul 2024 20:47:39 +0200 Message-ID: <87h6d1vy2c.ffs@tglx> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-pci@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Marek! On Sat, Jul 06 2024 at 15:27, Marek Vasut wrote: > This is an RFC patch, I am looking for input on the approach taken here. > If the approach is sound, this patch would be split into proper patchset. > > Various PCIe controllers that mux MSIs onto single IRQ line produce these > "IRQ%d: set affinity failed" warnings when entering suspend. This has been > discussed before [1] [2] and an example test case is included at the end > of this commit message. > > Attempt to silence the warning by returning specific error code -EOPNOTSUPP > from the irqchip .irq_set_affinity callback, which skips printing the warning > in cpuhotplug.c . The -EOPNOTSUPP was chosen because it indicates exactly what > the problem is, it is not possible to set affinity of each MSI IRQ line to a > specific CPU due to hardware limitation. Why does the irq_chip in question have an irq_set_affinity() callback in the first place? Thanks, tglx