[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <967f9b61-41d6-4a4a-adc4-0b3c742bcddc@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2023 14:21:28 -0700
From: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@...el.com>
To: Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>, Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
"Peter Newman" <peternewman@...gle.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
"Shuah Khan" <skhan@...uxfoundation.org>, <x86@...nel.org>
CC: Shaopeng Tan <tan.shaopeng@...itsu.com>,
James Morse <james.morse@....com>,
Jamie Iles <quic_jiles@...cinc.com>,
Babu Moger <babu.moger@....com>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>,
<patches@...ts.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 4/8] x86/resctrl: Split the rdt_domain and
rdt_hw_domain structures
Hi Tony,
On 10/20/2023 2:30 PM, Tony Luck wrote:
> The same rdt_domain structure is used for both control and monitor
> functions. But this results in wasted memory as some of the fields are
> only used by control functions, while most are only used for monitor
> functions.
>
> Split into separate rdt_ctrl_domain and rdt_mon_domain structures with
> just the fields required for control and monitoring respectively.
Sounds like a motivation for the cpumask to form part of the
common header?
Reinette
Powered by blists - more mailing lists