Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3] genirq/affinity: Create and transfer more irq desc
 info by a new structure
To:     Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Kashyap Desai <kashyap.desai@broadcom.com>,
        shivasharan.srikanteshwara@broadcom.com,
        Sumit Saxena <sumit.saxena@broadcom.com>, ming.lei@redhat.com,
        Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
References: <20181128164503.6194-1-douliyangs@gmail.com>
 <CAErSpo5NCy6C7xqaWUNnC2uY+RRpZnbpOJUQxrz0aER-g6+XqQ@mail.gmail.com>
From:   Dou Liyang <douliyangs@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <b6f3cbb6-60b7-1425-9bff-0ac4565f56a7@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 29 Nov 2018 22:30:22 +0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAErSpo5NCy6C7xqaWUNnC2uY+RRpZnbpOJUQxrz0aER-g6+XqQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Hi Bjorn,

on 2018/11/29 4:00, Bjorn Helgaas wrote:
> [+cc linux-pci]
> Since you mention reports, are there URLs to mailing list archives you
> can include?
OK, I will add it:

https://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=153543887027997&w=2

>> -       entry = alloc_msi_entry(&dev->dev, nvec, masks);
>> +       entry = alloc_msi_entry(&dev->dev, nvec, affi_desc);
> 
> Can you split this into two or more patches?  Most of these changes

Yes, next non-RFC version will do.

> are trivial and not very interesting, and the fact that they're all in
> one patch makes it hard to find and review the interesting bits.  For
> example,
> 
>    1) Rename all the local variables while keeping the type the same
> (or just leave the name the same; I think "affinity" would be a fine
> name, and I would be OK if we ended up with "struct irq_affinity_desc
> *masks" or "struct irq_affinity_desc *affinity").  This patch would
> obviously have no functional impact and would remove a lot of the
> trivial changes.
> Oops, how stupid I am !

>    2) Add "struct irq_affinity_desc" containing only "struct cpumask
> masks" and irq_create_affinity_desc() (or leave the name as
> irq_create_affinity_masks() and adjust the signature).  This would
> also have no functional impact and would be a fairly trivial patch.
> >    3) Add "flags" to struct irq_affinity_desc and the related code.
> This is the real meat of your patch, and with the above out of the
> way, it will be much smaller and it'll be obvious what the important
> changes are.
> 
I see, :)

Thanks,
	dou