On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 09:47:53AM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 01, 2012 at 10:40:51AM +0200, Joerg Roedel wrote:
> > Don't understand this. What is not set?
>
> the IRQ_DELAYED_DISABLE. But I could not even find that enum anymore?
> Has that been obsoleted?
You are right, its was removed. Ok, I will remove that line of the
comment too.
> I was thinking the other way around. You recover the old affinity. Should
> you print out a warning mentioning to the system admin that you could not
> set the new affinity but reverted to the old one? Or will that not serve
> anything except spam the kernel logs?
Well, I don't think it makes sense to print an additional error at this
point. The error will be propagated upwards in the call-chain and in the
end it is up to the initiator how to handle this situation (for example
just return a failure to user-space).
Joerg
--
AMD Operating System Research Center
Advanced Micro Devices GmbH Einsteinring 24 85609 Dornach
General Managers: Alberto Bozzo
Registration: Dornach, Landkr. Muenchen; Registerger. Muenchen, HRB Nr. 43632
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
