On Fri, Apr 30, 2021 at 2:21 PM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Nitesh, > > On Fri, Apr 30 2021 at 12:14, Nitesh Lal wrote: > > Based on this analysis and the fact that with your re-work the interrupts > > seems to be naturally spread across the CPUs, will it be safe to revert > > Jesse's patch > > > > e2e64a932 genirq: Set initial affinity in irq_set_affinity_hint() > > > > as it overwrites the previously set IRQ affinity mask for some of the > > devices? > > That's a good question. My gut feeling says yes. > Jesse do you want to send the revert for the patch? Also, I think it was you who suggested cc'ing intel-wired-lan ml as that allows intel folks, to do some initial testing? If so, we can do that here (IMHO). > > IMHO if we think that this patch is still solving some issue other than > > what Jesse has mentioned then perhaps we should reproduce that and fix it > > directly from the request_irq code path. > > Makes sense. > > Thanks, > > tglx > -- Thanks Nitesh
