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 0951834DB7F; Wed, 12 Nov 2025 18:27:39 +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=1762972062; cv=none; b=KWQihmptsr210TxGrbct/0DOK027ukTSw4ButmFjm8u39cFHsBYSFKMGAXicQ6hl7dZ0zzAQo8EzAUj7whtFtz3kyfqYo9bI/ziijua8ovTguDWv8XF5lCjYhz2d72I/BITYYVAn9nXGmtOlxfbGqUh2rIWNHzn2nhuFlYfPHRI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1762972062; c=relaxed/simple; bh=lvk/smEJNeQBj0VHoIfrwk0u+PsEGYCtIbgwF2adYTQ=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=RYMU7JqbAbm97HU6VSn/ez3gFMARHr6hJNuhBWPk0+zEYfqxswfyYlk8OD3G030QOYSysuT4T88Ap4i4UT8srcLIOblZ6RThugJMD4Q9iz0l1oyZdZGRK5Ptt+k3OjxDK+Qn63UXAkdzoHN7MvoGDOAsA2Xite40FCXs5zWZQn4= 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 4d6BhP52h0zHnH4q; Thu, 13 Nov 2025 02:27:17 +0800 (CST) Received: from dubpeml100005.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.214.146.113]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3B7011402FB; Thu, 13 Nov 2025 02:27:37 +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 18:27:36 +0000 Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2025 18:27:35 +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 17/26] genirq: Add request_percpu_irq_affinity() helper Message-ID: <20251112182735.00001363@huawei.com> In-Reply-To: <20251020122944.3074811-18-maz@kernel.org> References: <20251020122944.3074811-1-maz@kernel.org> <20251020122944.3074811-18-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: lhrpeml500009.china.huawei.com (7.191.174.84) To dubpeml100005.china.huawei.com (7.214.146.113) On Mon, 20 Oct 2025 13:29:34 +0100 Marc Zyngier wrote: > While it would be nice to simply make request_percpu_irq() take > an affinity mask, the churn is likely to be on the irritating side > given that most drivers do not give a damn about affinities. Only 37 instances. I'd have been tempted to do it anyway :) > > So take the more innocuous path to provide a helper that parallels > request_percpu_irq(), with an affinity as a bonus argument. > > Yes, request_percpu_irq_affinity() is a bit of a mouthful. > > Tested-by: Will Deacon > Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron