[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <SJ1PR11MB6083E6C980B4BD1AD84ABDD7FCC3A@SJ1PR11MB6083.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2023 17:18:32 +0000
From: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
To: "babu.moger@....com" <babu.moger@....com>,
"Yu, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
"Chatre, Reinette" <reinette.chatre@...el.com>,
Peter Newman <peternewman@...gle.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Shuah Khan <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>
CC: Shaopeng Tan <tan.shaopeng@...itsu.com>,
James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
Jamie Iles <quic_jiles@...cinc.com>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-doc@...r.kernel.org" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
"patches@...ts.linux.dev" <patches@...ts.linux.dev>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v5 1/8] x86/resctrl: Prepare for new domain scope
>> +enum resctrl_scope {
>> + RESCTRL_L3_CACHE,
>> + RESCTRL_L2_CACHE,
>> +};
>
> How about?
>
> enum resctrl_scope {
> RESCTRL_L2_CACHE = 2,
> RESCTRL_L3_CACHE,
> };
Babu. Thanks for the review.
Reinette made the same observation. I'm updating the
patch to do this. With small extra defensive step to explicitly define
RESCTRL_L3_CACHE = 3,
rather than relying on the compiler picking the next integer ... just in
case somebody adds another enum between the L2 and L3 lines.
-Tony
Powered by blists - more mailing lists