> From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2022 8:51 AM > To: Dexuan Cui <decui@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > This has only observations with no explanations, and I don't see how > it will be useful to future readers of the git history. Please see the below. > I assume you bisected the problem to b4b77778ecc5? Yes. > Can you just revert that? A revert requires no more explanation than > "this broke something." It's better to not revert b4b77778ecc5, which is required by Jeff's Multi-MSI device, which doesn't seem to be affected by the interrupt issue I described. > I guess this is a fine distinction, but I really don't like random > code changes that "seem to avoid a problem but we don't know how." > A revert at least has the advantage that we can cover our eyes and > pretend the commit never happened. This patch feels like future > readers will have to try to understand the code even though we > clearly don't understand why it makes a difference. I just replied to Lorenzo's email with more details. FYI, this is the link to my reply: https://lwn.net/ml/linux-kernel/SA1PR21MB1335D08F987BBAE08EADF010BF6B9@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ I just felt the commit message might be too long if I had put all the details there. :-) Can we add a Links: tag? Thanks, -- Dexuan
