[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALcN6mi46MGiufWECbWCVkdPgxWr0MGKq0uoBWpfH-JZzf9=SA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 12:58:24 -0700
From: David Carrillo-Cisneros <davidcc@...gle.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
"Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Vikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@...ux.intel.com>,
"Shivappa, Vikas" <vikas.shivappa@...el.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
"mingo@...nel.org" <mingo@...nel.org>,
"peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"Shankar, Ravi V" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
"Yu, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
"Kleen, Andi" <andi.kleen@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] x86/cqm: Cqm requirements
>> I am ok removing the perf-like CPU filtering from the requirements.
>
> So if I'm not missing something then ALL remaining requirements can be
> solved with the RDT integrated monitoring mechanics, right?
>
Right.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists