Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754309AbcDKR0g (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Apr 2016 13:26:36 -0400 Received: from youngberry.canonical.com ([91.189.89.112]:35394 "EHLO youngberry.canonical.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753055AbcDKR0f convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Mon, 11 Apr 2016 13:26:35 -0400 From: Joseph Salisbury Subject: [4.5-rc4 Regression] qla2xxx: Add irq affinity notification To: quinn.tran@qlogic.com Cc: qla2xxx-upstream@qlogic.com, jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com, "Martin K. Petersen" , linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, LKML , hch@lst.de, bart.vanassche@sandisk.com, himanshu.madhani@qlogic.com, nab@linux-iscsi.org Message-ID: <570BDE44.5020301@canonical.com> Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2016 13:26:28 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1392 Lines: 50 Hello Quinn, A kernel bug report was opened against Ubuntu [0]. After a kernel bisect, it was found that reverting the following commit resolved this bug: commit cdb898c52d1dfad4b4800b83a58b3fe5d352edde Author: Quinn Tran Date: Thu Dec 17 14:57:05 2015 -0500 qla2xxx: Add irq affinity notification However, the prior commit also required the following three commits to also be reverted: commit 5327c7dbd1a7fd980608f44789076a636e5ee5fc Author: Quinn Tran Date: Wed Feb 10 18:59:14 2016 -0500 qla2xxx: use TARGET_SCF_USE_CPUID flag to indiate CPU Affinity commit 9095adaab8c1d82707e4e9961b6ad79b62f3361b Author: Quinn Tran Date: Wed Feb 10 18:59:13 2016 -0500 target/transport: add flag to indicate CPU Affinity is observed commit fb3269baf4ecc2ce6d17d4eb537080035bdf6d5b Author: Quinn Tran Date: Thu Dec 17 14:57:06 2015 -0500 qla2xxx: Add selective command queuing The regression was introduced as of v4.5-rc4. I was hoping to get your feedback, since you are the patch author. The dependant reverts all look like they are improving cpu affinity, which would likely impact performance. Do you thing there is a way forward instead of the reverts, or would it be best to submit a revert request? Thanks, Joe [0] http://pad.lv/1554003