Re: [PATCH v4 0/5] Allow dyn MSI-X vector allocation of MANA

[Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>]

On Thu, May 29, 2025 at 06:28:45AM -0700, Shradha Gupta wrote:
> On Wed, May 28, 2025 at 07:55:08PM +0100, Simon Horman wrote:
> > On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 08:57:33AM -0700, Shradha Gupta wrote:
> > > In this patchset we want to enable the MANA driver to be able to
> > > allocate MSI-X vectors in PCI dynamically.
> > > 
> > > The first patch exports pci_msix_prepare_desc() in PCI to be able to
> > > correctly prepare descriptors for dynamically added MSI-X vectors.
> > > 
> > > The second patch adds the support of dynamic vector allocation in
> > > pci-hyperv PCI controller by enabling the MSI_FLAG_PCI_MSIX_ALLOC_DYN
> > > flag and using the pci_msix_prepare_desc() exported in first patch.
> > > 
> > > The third patch adds a detailed description of the irq_setup(), to
> > > help understand the function design better.
> > > 
> > > The fourth patch is a preparation patch for mana changes to support
> > > dynamic IRQ allocation. It contains changes in irq_setup() to allow
> > > skipping first sibling CPU sets, in case certain IRQs are already
> > > affinitized to them.
> > > 
> > > The fifth patch has the changes in MANA driver to be able to allocate
> > > MSI-X vectors dynamically. If the support does not exist it defaults to
> > > older behavior.
> > 
> > Hi Shradha,
> > 
> > It's unclear what the target tree for this patch-set is.
> > But if it is net-next, which seems likely given the code under
> > drivers/net/, then:
> > 
> > Please include that target in the subject of each patch in the patch-set.
> > 
> > 	Subject: [PATCH v5 net-next 0/5] ...
> > 
> > And, moreover, ...
> > 
> > ## Form letter - net-next-closed
> > 
> > The merge window for v6.16 has begun and therefore net-next is closed
> > for new drivers, features, code refactoring and optimizations. We are
> > currently accepting bug fixes only.
> > 
> > Please repost when net-next reopens after June 8th.
> > 
> > RFC patches sent for review only are obviously welcome at any time.
> 
> Thank you Simon.
> 
> While posting this patchset I was a bit confused about what should be
> the target tree. That's why in the cover letter of the V1 for this
> series, I had requested more clarity on the same (since there are patches
> from PCI and net-next both).
> 
> In such cases how do we decide which tree to target?

Yes, that isn't entirely clear to me either.
Hopefully the maintainers can negotiate this.

> 
> Also, noted about the next merge window for net-next :-)
> 
> Regards,
> Shradha.
>