[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7c971383-1695-7905-603e-99ff5916f691@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Oct 2018 11:54:49 -0700
From: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@...el.com>
To: "Moger, Babu" <Babu.Moger@....com>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"hpa@...or.com" <hpa@...or.com>,
"fenghua.yu@...el.com" <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
"vikas.shivappa@...ux.intel.com" <vikas.shivappa@...ux.intel.com>,
"tony.luck@...el.com" <tony.luck@...el.com>
Cc: "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"peterz@...radead.org" <peterz@...radead.org>,
"pombredanne@...b.com" <pombredanne@...b.com>,
"gregkh@...uxfoundation.org" <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
"kstewart@...uxfoundation.org" <kstewart@...uxfoundation.org>,
"bp@...e.de" <bp@...e.de>,
"rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
"ak@...ux.intel.com" <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
"kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com" <kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com>,
"xiaochen.shen@...el.com" <xiaochen.shen@...el.com>,
"colin.king@...onical.com" <colin.king@...onical.com>,
"Hurwitz, Sherry" <sherry.hurwitz@....com>,
"Lendacky, Thomas" <Thomas.Lendacky@....com>,
"pbonzini@...hat.com" <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
"dwmw@...zon.co.uk" <dwmw@...zon.co.uk>,
"luto@...nel.org" <luto@...nel.org>,
"jroedel@...e.de" <jroedel@...e.de>,
"jannh@...gle.com" <jannh@...gle.com>,
"dima@...sta.com" <dima@...sta.com>,
"jpoimboe@...hat.com" <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
"vkuznets@...hat.com" <vkuznets@...hat.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 03/10] arch/x86: Re-arrange RDT init code
Hi Babu,
On 10/2/2018 4:41 PM, Moger, Babu wrote:
> On 10/02/2018 02:21 PM, Reinette Chatre wrote:
>> On 9/24/2018 12:19 PM, Moger, Babu wrote:
>>> static enum cpuhp_state rdt_online;
>>> @@ -866,8 +872,22 @@ static int __init rdt_late_init(void)
>>> struct rdt_resource *r;
>>> int state, ret;
>>>
>>> - if (!get_rdt_resources())
>>> + /* Run quirks first */
>>> + rdt_quirks();
>>> +
>>> + rdt_alloc_capable = get_rdt_alloc_resources();
>>> + rdt_mon_capable = get_rdt_mon_resources();
>>> +
>>> + if (!(rdt_alloc_capable || rdt_mon_capable)) {
>>> + pr_info("RDT allocation or monitoring not detected\n");
>>
>> This function ends with a log entry for every resource discovered. Is
>> this new log entry needed to indicate that such resources have not been
>> found? Could it not just be the absence of the other message?
>
> As this is relatively new feature, so I added this info message. It helped
> me debug what went wrong. Otherwise, I don't see anything. I can remove it
> if the message is too annoying to the user.
This log entry is made after detection of resources/features supported
by the system. A user would find more information in the
presence/absence of the relevant CPU feature flags in /proc/cpuinfo.
Reinette
Powered by blists - more mailing lists