linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/intel_rdt: Add cpus

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1703311046030.1780@nanos>
Date:   Fri, 31 Mar 2017 10:47:52 +0200 (CEST)
From:   Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
To:     Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
cc:     Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
        Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>, Shaohua Li <shli@...com>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/intel_rdt: Add cpus_list rdtgroup file

On Wed, 29 Mar 2017, Fenghua Yu wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 05:09:48PM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > While playing with the resctrl interface I found it much
> > easier to deal with cpumask list rather than just regular
> > cpumask.
> 
> Could you please explain specifically why and when it's easier
> to deal with cpumask list? In programming cases, cpumask
> and cpumask list are almost same. And people are working
> on higher level tools to control resctrl. The tools can
> hide detailed regular cpumask or cpumask list and user
> doesn't need to care lower level format of cpumask. So
> is it really useful to add cpus_list?

Yes, because a lot of people including me do not care about these tools at
all. Making it easy to read and write from the command line is the first
thing to do.

Thanks,

	tglx