On Wed, May 28, 2025 at 07:55:08PM +0100, Simon Horman wrote: > On Tue, May 27, 2025 at 08:57:33AM -0700, Shradha Gupta wrote: > > In this patchset we want to enable the MANA driver to be able to > > allocate MSI-X vectors in PCI dynamically. > > > > The first patch exports pci_msix_prepare_desc() in PCI to be able to > > correctly prepare descriptors for dynamically added MSI-X vectors. > > > > The second patch adds the support of dynamic vector allocation in > > pci-hyperv PCI controller by enabling the MSI_FLAG_PCI_MSIX_ALLOC_DYN > > flag and using the pci_msix_prepare_desc() exported in first patch. > > > > The third patch adds a detailed description of the irq_setup(), to > > help understand the function design better. > > > > The fourth patch is a preparation patch for mana changes to support > > dynamic IRQ allocation. It contains changes in irq_setup() to allow > > skipping first sibling CPU sets, in case certain IRQs are already > > affinitized to them. > > > > The fifth patch has the changes in MANA driver to be able to allocate > > MSI-X vectors dynamically. If the support does not exist it defaults to > > older behavior. > > Hi Shradha, > > It's unclear what the target tree for this patch-set is. > But if it is net-next, which seems likely given the code under > drivers/net/, then: > > Please include that target in the subject of each patch in the patch-set. > > Subject: [PATCH v5 net-next 0/5] ... > > And, moreover, ... > > ## Form letter - net-next-closed > > The merge window for v6.16 has begun and therefore net-next is closed > for new drivers, features, code refactoring and optimizations. We are > currently accepting bug fixes only. > > Please repost when net-next reopens after June 8th. > > RFC patches sent for review only are obviously welcome at any time.
Thank you Simon. While posting this patchset I was a bit confused about what should be the target tree. That's why in the cover letter of the V1 for this series, I had requested more clarity on the same (since there are patches from PCI and net-next both). In such cases how do we decide which tree to target? Also, noted about the next merge window for net-next :-) Regards, Shradha.
