Dear Greg, dear Linux folks,
On 10/01/18 17:59, Paul Menzel wrote:
On 10/01/18 14:43, Paul Menzel wrote:
On 10/01/18 14:35, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Mon, Oct 01, 2018 at 02:33:07PM +0200, Paul Menzel wrote:
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2018 17:28:45 +0200
This reverts commit ef86f3a72adb8a7931f67335560740a7ad696d1d.
This seems rather odd. If at all you'd revert the patch adding the PCI_IRQ_AFFINITY to aacraid, not core infrastructure.
Thank you for the suggestion, but that flag was added in 2016 to the aacraid driver.
commit 0910d8bbdd99856af1394d3d8830955abdefee4a Author: Hannes Reinecke hare@suse.de Date: Tue Nov 8 08:11:30 2016 +0100
scsi: aacraid: switch to pci_alloc_irq_vectorsUse pci_alloc_irq_vectors and drop the hand-crafted interrupt affinity routines.
So what would happen, if `PCI_IRQ_AFFINITY` was removed? Will the system still work with the same performance?
As far as I understood, the no regression policy is there for exactly that reason, and it shouldn’t matter if it’s core infrastructure or not. As written, I have no idea, and just know reverting the commit in question fixes the problem here. So I’ll gladly test other solutions to fix this issue.
Just as another datapoint, with `PCI_IRQ_AFFINITY` removed from `drivers/scsi/aacraid/comminit.c` in Linux 4.14.73, the driver initializes correctly. I have no idea regarding the performance.
This commit has not been picked up yet. I guess, you are busy, but in case there are still objections, it’d be great if the two questions below were answered.
1. What bug is fixed in the LTS series by backporting the commit causing the regression?
2. Why does the *no regression* policy *not* apply in this case?
Kind regards,
Paul
[1]: Documentation/process/stable-kernel-rules.rst