public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@kernel.org>
To: Zhan Xusheng <zhanxusheng1024@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-irq@vger.kernel.org,
	Zhan Xusheng <zhanxusheng@xiaomi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] genirq/matrix: Avoid implicit tie-breaking by CPU iteration order
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2026 12:16:35 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87a4xy9ecs.ffs@tglx> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260128031406.9473-3-zhanxusheng@xiaomi.com>

On Wed, Jan 28 2026 at 11:14, Zhan Xusheng wrote:
> matrix_find_best_cpu_managed() updates best_cpu even when two CPUs
> have the same managed_allocated count. As a result, the final
> selection implicitly depends on CPU iteration order.

And?

> Update the comparison to replace the current best CPU only when a
> CPU has a strictly smaller managed_allocated value. This removes
> the iteration-order-based tie-breaking for equal cases.

And replaces it by a different iteration order based decision, no?

What are you actually trying to solve here and why does it matter at
all? If it solves nothing then what's the point?

> This patch intentionally changes the selection behavior.

1) # git grep 'This patch' Documentation/process/

2) It's already clear from the above that this changes the behaviour, so
   no point in repeating the obvious.

   The phrase "No functional change intended" is very different because
   it tells the reviewer that this is a pure code refactoring.

Thanks,

        tglx

      reply	other threads:[~2026-01-28 11:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-01-27  2:41 [PATCH v2] genirq/matrix: Clarify CPU selection logic Zhan Xusheng
2026-01-27  8:37 ` Thomas Gleixner
2026-01-28  3:14   ` [PATCH v3 0/2] genirq/matrix: CPU selection cleanup and tie-breaking fix Zhan Xusheng
2026-01-28  3:14     ` [PATCH v3 1/2] genirq/matrix: Clarify CPU selection logic Zhan Xusheng
2026-01-28 11:11       ` Thomas Gleixner
2026-01-28  3:14     ` [PATCH v3 2/2] genirq/matrix: Avoid implicit tie-breaking by CPU iteration order Zhan Xusheng
2026-01-28 11:16       ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=87a4xy9ecs.ffs@tglx \
    --to=tglx@kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-irq@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=zhanxusheng1024@gmail.com \
    --cc=zhanxusheng@xiaomi.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox