[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150107121617.GF25325@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2015 13:16:17 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Matt Fleming <matt@...sole-pimps.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Kanaka Juvva <kanaka.d.juvva@...el.com>,
Matt Fleming <matt.fleming@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 10/11] perf/x86/intel: Perform rotation on Intel CQM
RMIDs
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 09:15:11PM +0000, Matt Fleming wrote:
+ /*
> + * A reasonable upper limit on the max threshold is the number
> + * of lines tagged per RMID if all RMIDs have the same number of
> + * lines tagged in the LLC.
> + *
> + * For a 35MB LLC and 56 RMIDs, this is ~1.8% of the LLC.
> + */
> + __intel_cqm_max_threshold =
> + boot_cpu_data.x86_cache_size * 1024 / (cqm_max_rmid + 1);
Seeing how a percentage is without unit, the 35MB figure seems
pointless.
Also, why would a flat distribution be a good measure for 'empty'? I
would think that would in fact constitute in use.
Should we make this 1/16th of this figure or any other random fraction <
1 ?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists