Re: [PATCH Dovetail v2 1/2] dovetail: genirq: Add request_percpu_irq_affinity_flags()
Florian Bezdeka <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | dev.linux.lists.xenomai |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Wed, 2026-02-18 at 08:30 +0100, Jan Kiszka wrote: > On 18.02.26 00:05, Florian Bezdeka wrote: > > On Tue, 2026-02-17 at 23:54 +0100, Florian Bezdeka wrote: > > > cobalt / evl are currently using __request_percpu_irq() for setting up > > > OOB IRQs. In 6.19 the signature of __request_percpu_irq() has been > > > updated and 7.0 will remove the function entirely, so we need a > > > replacement. > > > > > > All other variants (like the upcoming request_percpu_irq_affinity()) > > > are missing the flags parameter which we require. > > > > > > This could be backported to all supported dovetail versions. That > > > would allow co-kernels to switch to the new API unconditionally. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Florian Bezdeka <[email protected]> > > > --- > > > include/linux/interrupt.h | 5 +++++ > > > kernel/irq/manage.c | 10 ++++++++++ > > > 2 files changed, 15 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/include/linux/interrupt.h b/include/linux/interrupt.h > > > index bf0511b438c65e119af917763ce92a8f3bfb4c4c..6cd8ad02ffbd87f71869d6737fbc8c1ae477c1ee 100644 > > > --- a/include/linux/interrupt.h > > > +++ b/include/linux/interrupt.h > > > @@ -213,6 +213,11 @@ request_percpu_irq_affinity(unsigned int irq, irq_handler_t handler, > > > devname, affinity, percpu_dev_id); > > > } > > > > > > +int request_percpu_irq_affinity_flags(unsigned int irq, irq_handler_t handler, > > > + unsigned long flags, const char *devname, > > > + const cpumask_t *affinity, > > > + void __percpu *dev_id); > > > + > > > > > > > Would be nice to get some feedback here. The affinity parameter is > > currently not in use, but would allow us to provide it in the future. > > Not sure if that will be necessary... > > > > This is what I was wondering as well... When would one need that? Maybe > in the context of confining Xenomai to a subset of physical CPUs? Would > be good to check that again. @Philippe: Any thoughts? I would like to complete the 6.19 port on Xenomai side. This is a blocker right now. > > > The idea behind were the upcoming 7.0 changes. The implementation of > > request_percpu_irq_affinity() could move to the dovetail specific > > variant and the Linux implementation can simply call the dovetail > > variant. >