On Wed, Aug 05, 2026 at 02:47:06PM +0800, Xiong Weimin wrote: > On Wed, Aug 05, 2026 at 01:37:01AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > "tmp" in what sense? if we can come up with a sensible name, just > > "affinity" will do. > > > > We do not need a comment arguing with previous version of the code. > > > > just assign to desc, instead? > > Thanks, will do. I will post a fresh [PATCH v2] as a new standalone > mail (not threaded under this one) with: > - a local "affinity" copy > - that comment dropped > - desc = &affinity, and keep passing desc > > On the virtio_input thread you also asked whether this is real or > theoretical for stable. For this virtio_pci patch: real when the caller > passes irq_affinity and MSI-X policy falls back. > > vp_find_vqs() retries EACH -> SHARED_SLOW -> SHARED. A failed > vp_request_msix_vectors() currently does desc->pre_vectors++ in place, > so a later successful attempt sees a polluted pre_vectors and gets the > wrong affinity layout. That fallback path is unconditional in the > driver. > > I have not collected a userspace failure log yet. Please let me know if > you still want Cc: stable on the v2. > > Thanks, > Xiong
do not cc stable on theoretical issue. there is a bit of a language issue. if the issue is real describe it: "this was observed: ... " if theoretical say so -- MST
