From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (frasgout.his.huawei.com [185.176.79.56]) (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 6BBCC344025; Wed, 12 Nov 2025 18:06:58 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.176.79.56 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1762970820; cv=none; b=ktIArdsbUS3fzjWJyKLRQE2vrSsbV2xhlfPCzFgUBuyWHnOV1JTn7d/eUaujLHHybwuxhfgXJoRL8l/PzSxWSOmmFZ1Nhz/TWKfbhfnB9/+jDVT0BL0YrKNejdfLKuRW7bTFoH6xIjLUT0zjdoVR0XezjcytWpSs/BfQzCeoklU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1762970820; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Z3v4U+Htx9d06oTcBm//zvYPXdfYm7Sm0oXUefaEoy0=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=kdMe9xeoaDLHqIvP8vvvVIxGNZlV6OUHtMWuoXyLg3tUrNTRXLvENM6BmIGwvimfDrSmAGBphFCqJtx2+E6BGfk78FjqkdEV4gO4mGxOHKMpBkooDwFf1OZkN2MjdJ58we/8qeeyFiqD2QR+f+uu0mo3JDONp0QllVkg69L9pMs= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=185.176.79.56 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.18.186.231]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTPS id 4d6BDX3GTfzHnH52; Thu, 13 Nov 2025 02:06:36 +0800 (CST) Received: from dubpeml100005.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.214.146.113]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EB4841402F1; Thu, 13 Nov 2025 02:06:55 +0800 (CST) Received: from localhost (10.203.177.15) by dubpeml100005.china.huawei.com (7.214.146.113) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1544.36; Wed, 12 Nov 2025 18:06:55 +0000 Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2025 18:06:53 +0000 From: Jonathan Cameron To: Marc Zyngier CC: , , , Thomas Gleixner , "Mark Rutland" , Will Deacon , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Rob Herring , "Saravana Kannan" , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Sven Peter , Janne Grunau , Suzuki K Poulose , James Clark , Jinjie Ruan , "Alexandru Elisei" Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 10/26] irqchip/gic-v3: Switch high priority PPIs over to handle_percpu_devid_irq() Message-ID: <20251112180653.00004e6c@huawei.com> In-Reply-To: <20251020122944.3074811-11-maz@kernel.org> References: <20251020122944.3074811-1-maz@kernel.org> <20251020122944.3074811-11-maz@kernel.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.3.0 (GTK 3.24.42; x86_64-w64-mingw32) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ClientProxiedBy: lhrpeml100012.china.huawei.com (7.191.174.184) To dubpeml100005.china.huawei.com (7.214.146.113) On Mon, 20 Oct 2025 13:29:27 +0100 Marc Zyngier wrote: > It so appears that handle_percpu_devid_irq() is extremely similar to > handle_percpu_devid_fasteoi_nmi(), and that the differences do no > justify the horrid machinery we have in the GICv3 driver to handle > the flow handler switch. > > Let's stick with the standard flow handler, even for NMIs. > > Suggested-by: Will Deacon > Tested-by: Will Deacon > Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier LGTM and who doesn't like those diff stats ;) Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron > --- > drivers/irqchip/irq-gic-v3.c | 54 ++---------------------------------- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 52 deletions(-)