On Tue, 05 Aug 2025 14:09:34 +0100, Sasha Levin <sashal@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > From: Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx> > > [ Upstream commit 3cc8f625e4c6a0e9f936da6b94166e62e387fe1d ] > > Since changing the affinity of an MSI really is about changing > the target address and that it isn't possible to mask an individual > MSI, it is completely possible for an interrupt to race with itself, > usually resulting in a lost interrupt. > > Paper over the design blunder by informing the core code of this > sad state of affairs. > > Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi@xxxxxxxxxx> > Signed-off-by: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@xxxxxxxxxx> > Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250708173404.1278635-11-maz@xxxxxxxxxx > Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > > LLM Generated explanations, may be completely bogus: s/may be//. It is an amusing read though, specially when quoting totally unrelated patches, so thumbs up for the comical value. But I'm not even going to entertain explaining *why* backporting this patch on its own is nonsense. Reading the original series should be enlightening enough. M. -- Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
