On 31/05/2017 21:12, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: > On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 02:00:37PM -0500, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: >> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 08:49:04PM +0200, Mason wrote: >>> On 31/05/2017 19:34, Bjorn Helgaas wrote: >>> ... >> >>>> This would be more an IRQ patch than a PCI patch, but if I were >>>> reviewing it, I would look for assurance that *all* the no-op >>>> .irq_set_affinity callbacks were cleaned up, not just those in >>>> drivers/pci/host. >>> >>> Are you saying the patch is *wrong* if not all "do-nothing" >>> callbacks are cleaned up? >> >> I'm saying that (1) this probably wouldn't be applied via the PCI >> tree, and (2) if it *were* applied via PCI, I would ask that all the >> no-op callbacks were cleaned up at the same time. >> >> Huh, that sounds a lot like what I wrote above. Was I unclear? > > I'm afraid this sounded snarky, which isn't my intention. It seems > like there's a useful patch here, and I didn't want to see it get > ignored for lack of following the usual process. If this is all > obvious to you, my apologies and please ignore my suggestion. Thanks for clearing things up. I had indeed assumed from your first reply that the patch was pointless. Writing a script locating all candidates will be an interesting exercise. Regards.
