[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1522217751.9730.80.camel@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2018 09:15:51 +0300
From: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@...il.com>
To: Thorsten Leemhuis <regressions@...mhuis.info>,
Ming Lei <ming.lei@...hat.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-block@...r.kernel.org, Laurence Oberman <loberman@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 0/4] genirq/affinity: irq vector spread among online
CPUs as far as possible
On Mon, 2018-03-26 at 10:39 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> Lo! Your friendly Linux regression tracker here ;-)
>
> On 08.03.2018 14:18, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
> > On Thu, 2018-03-08 at 18:53 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> > > This patchset tries to spread among online CPUs as far as possible, so
> > > that we can avoid to allocate too less irq vectors with online CPUs
> > > mapped.
> >
> > […]
> > Tested-by: Artem Bityutskiy <artem.bityutskiy@...el.com>
> > Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/1519311270.2535.53.camel@intel.com
> >
> > this patchset fixes the v4.16-rcX regression that I reported few weeks
> > ago. I applied it and verified that Dell R640 server that I mentioned
> > in the bug report boots up and the disk works.
>
> Artem (or anyone else), what's the status here? I have this on my list
> of regressions, but it looks like there wasn't any progress in the past
> week. Or was it discussed somewhere else or even fixed in the meantime
> and I missed it? Ciao, Thorsten
Hi, it is not fixed in upstream.
I got an e-mail from James that the fixes are in his tree in the
"fixes" branch. There is no word about when it will be merged. There is
also no stable tag.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists