[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1701191851310.5358@nanos>
Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 18:54:25 +0100 (CET)
From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To: David Carrillo-Cisneros <davidcc@...gle.com>
cc: Shivappa Vikas <vikas.shivappa@...el.com>,
Vikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@...ux.intel.com>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
x86 <x86@...nel.org>, hpa@...or.com,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
"Shankar, Ravi V" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>, andi.kleen@...el.com,
"H. Peter Anvin" <h.peter.anvin@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/12] Cqm2: Intel Cache quality monitoring fixes
On Thu, 19 Jan 2017, David Carrillo-Cisneros wrote:
> A 1:1 mapping between CLOSID/"Resource group" to RMID, as Fenghua suggested
> is very problematic because the number of CLOSIDs is much much smaller than the
> number of RMIDs, and, as Stephane mentioned it's a common use case to want to
> independently monitor many task/cgroups inside an allocation partition.
Again, that was not my intention. I just want to limit the combinations.
> A 1:many mapping of CLOSID to RMIDs may work as a cheap replacement of
> cgroup monitoring but the case where CLOSID changes would be messy. In
CLOSIDs of RDT groups do not change. They are allocated when the group is
created.
Thanks,
tglx
Powered by blists - more mailing lists