[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <IA1PR11MB6097F30C481A74FE9305EEA29BFF9@IA1PR11MB6097.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2023 18:01:49 +0000
From: "Yu, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
To: James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
CC: "Chatre, Reinette" <reinette.chatre@...el.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
H Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>,
Babu Moger <Babu.Moger@....com>,
"shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com"
<shameerali.kolothum.thodi@...wei.com>,
D Scott Phillips OS <scott@...amperecomputing.com>,
"carl@...amperecomputing.com" <carl@...amperecomputing.com>,
"lcherian@...vell.com" <lcherian@...vell.com>,
"bobo.shaobowang@...wei.com" <bobo.shaobowang@...wei.com>,
"tan.shaopeng@...itsu.com" <tan.shaopeng@...itsu.com>,
Jamie Iles <quic_jiles@...cinc.com>,
Xin Hao <xhao@...ux.alibaba.com>,
"xingxin.hx@...nanolis.org" <xingxin.hx@...nanolis.org>,
"baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com" <baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>,
"peternewman@...gle.com" <peternewman@...gle.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 01/18] x86/resctrl: Track the closid with the rmid
Hi, James,
> >> a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/monitor.c
> >> b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/monitor.c
> >> index efe0c30d3a12..f1f66c9942a5 100644
> >> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/monitor.c
> >> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/monitor.c
> >> @@ -25,6 +25,7 @@
> >> #include "internal.h"
> >>
> >> struct rmid_entry {
> >> + u32 closid;
> >
> > Could you please add a comment for this closid field? It's expected to be form
> x86 RMID entry.
> > So it's deserved a comment to explain a bit more on this field.
>
> Sure ... what does it need to convey?
> I'm not sure what you mean by "expected to be form x86 RMID entry".
My typo, should be "not expected".
>
> My medium verbosity version looks like this:
> | /*
> | * Some architectures's resctrl_arch_rmid_read() needs the CLOSID value
> | * in order to access the correct monitor. This field provides the
> | * value to list walkers like __check_limbo(). On x86 this is ignored.
> | */
>
>
> Does this cover it?
Looks good to me.
Thanks.
-Fenghua
Powered by blists - more mailing lists