Re: [PATCH] x86, fix x86 fixup_irqs() error handling

[David Rientjes]

On Wed, 5 Mar 2014, Prarit Bhargava wrote:

> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/irq.c b/arch/x86/kernel/irq.c
> index d99f31d..55fab61 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/irq.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/irq.c
> @@ -351,6 +351,7 @@ void fixup_irqs(void)
>  	struct irq_desc *desc;
>  	struct irq_data *data;
>  	struct irq_chip *chip;
> +	int ret;
>  
>  	for_each_irq_desc(irq, desc) {
>  		int break_affinity = 0;
> @@ -389,8 +390,12 @@ void fixup_irqs(void)
>  		if (!irqd_can_move_in_process_context(data) && chip->irq_mask)
>  			chip->irq_mask(data);
>  
> -		if (chip->irq_set_affinity)
> -			chip->irq_set_affinity(data, affinity, true);
> +		if (chip->irq_set_affinity) {
> +			ret = chip->irq_set_affinity(data, affinity, true);
> +			WARN(ret == -ENOSPC,
> +			     "IRQ %d set affinity failed with %d.  The device assigned to this IRQ is unstable.\n",
> +			     irq, ret);

Should this be WARN_ON_ONCE() to avoid filling the kernel log instead?

It doesn't make much sense to print out the negative return value, maybe 
you meant to print -ret instead?

> +		}
>  		else if (!(warned++))
>  			set_affinity = 0;
>  
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/