[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aFKSLblsjXoMxK2W@hovoldconsulting.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2025 12:17:17 +0200
From: Johan Hovold <johan@...nel.org>
To: Brian Norris <briannorris@...omium.org>
Cc: Aleksandrs Vinarskis <alex.vinarskis@...il.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Tsai Sung-Fu <danielsftsai@...gle.com>,
Douglas Anderson <dianders@...omium.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] genirq: Retain depth for managed IRQs across CPU
hotplug
On Thu, Jun 12, 2025 at 11:40:38AM -0700, Brian Norris wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 12:08:16PM -0700, Brian Norris wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 08:56:40AM +0200, Aleksandrs Vinarskis wrote:
> > > Yes. Dell XPS 9345 is arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/x1e80100.dtsi based,
> > > and Asus Zenbook A14 is arch/arm64/boot/dts/qcom/x1p42100.dtsi based,
> > > which is a derivative but has a slightly different PCIe setup. So far
> > > both laptops would behave in the same ways.
> >
> > Thanks. So that's what I suspected, a DWC/pcie-qcom PCIe driver, and
> > seemingly standard NVMe on top. pcie-qcom doesn't seem to do anything
> > weird regarding MSIs or affinity, [...]
>
> For the record, I was reminded that DWC/pcie-qcom does not, in fact,
> support irq_chip::irq_set_affinity(), which could perhaps be a unique
> factor in his systems' behavior.
No, we use the GIC ITS for the NVMe interrupts on X1E so that should
not be involved here.
Johan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists