[PATCH AUTOSEL 6.16-6.6] PCI: xgene-msi: Resend an MSI racing with itself on a different CPU

[Sasha Levin]

On Tue, Aug 05, 2025 at 02:20:52PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
>On Tue, 05 Aug 2025 14:09:34 +0100,
>Sasha Levin <sashal at kernel.org> wrote:
>>
>> From: Marc Zyngier <maz at kernel.org>
>>
>> [ 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 at kernel.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Lorenzo Pieralisi <lpieralisi at kernel.org>
>> Signed-off-by: Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas at google.com>
>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20250708173404.1278635-11-maz@kernel.org
>> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal at kernel.org>
>> ---
>>
>> 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.

Yeah, it's still very much at the "junior engineer" level, but honestly
I think that just the boolean yes/no answers out of it provides a better
noise to signal ratio than the older AUTOSEL.

>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.

Sadly it doesn't have the context to understand that that specific
conmit is part of a larger series. That information just disappears when
patches are applied into git.

I'll drop it, thanks!

-- 
Thanks,
Sasha