Re: [PATCH] irq: revert non-working patch to affinity defaults

Ingo Molnar
2015-04-04T09:34:08Z

* Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com> wrote:

> > 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.

Well, as a starter, if you can reproduce it on a system (I cannot),
then try to stick a few printks in there to print out the affinity
mask as it gets changed plus dump_stack(), and see who changes it
back?

Chances are it's irqbalanced? If not then the stack dump will tell. It
shouldn't be too chatty.

(trace_printk() if you prefer traces.)

Thanks,

Ingo