[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZiE7qnq9D11o3ldb@e133380.arm.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 16:26:34 +0100
From: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@....com>
To: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@...el.com>
Cc: James Morse <james.morse@....com>, x86@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...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,
D Scott Phillips OS <scott@...amperecomputing.com>,
carl@...amperecomputing.com, lcherian@...vell.com,
bobo.shaobowang@...wei.com, tan.shaopeng@...itsu.com,
baolin.wang@...ux.alibaba.com, Jamie Iles <quic_jiles@...cinc.com>,
Xin Hao <xhao@...ux.alibaba.com>, peternewman@...gle.com,
dfustini@...libre.com, amitsinght@...vell.com,
David Hildenbrand <david@...hat.com>,
Rex Nie <rex.nie@...uarmicro.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 12/31] x86/resctrl: Move max_{name,data}_width into
resctrl code
On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 10:16:45PM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> Hi Dave,
>
> On 4/17/2024 7:41 AM, Dave Martin wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 10:38:20AM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> >> On 4/11/2024 7:15 AM, Dave Martin wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Apr 08, 2024 at 08:19:15PM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> >>>> Hi James,
> >>>>
> >>>> On 3/21/2024 9:50 AM, James Morse wrote:
> >>>>> @@ -2595,6 +2601,12 @@ static int schemata_list_add(struct rdt_resource *r, enum resctrl_conf_type type
> >>>>> if (cl > max_name_width)
> >>>>> max_name_width = cl;
> >>>>>
> >>>>> + /*
> >>>>> + * Choose a width for the resource data based on the resource that has
> >>>>> + * widest name and cbm.
> >>>>
> >>>> Please check series to ensure upper case is used for acronyms.
> >>>
> >>> [...]
> >>>
> >>>> Reinette
> >>>
> >>> This patch is just moving existing code around AFAICT. See:
> >>> commit de016df88f23 ("x86/intel_rdt: Update schemata read to show data in tabular format")
> >>>
> >>> Since no new usage of any term is being introduced here, can it be
> >>> left as-is?
> >>>
> >>> There seem to be other uses of "cbm" with this sense in the resctrl
> >>> code already.
> >>
> >> I am not asking to change all existing usages of these terms but in
> >> any new changes, please use upper case for acronyms.
> >
> > While there is a general argument to be made here, it sounds from this
> > like you are not requesting a change to this patch; can you confirm?
>
> Sorry for confusion. I do think in a small change like this it is a good
> opportunity to make sure the style is clean. Since this changes the code
> anyway, it might as well ensure the style is clean. So, yes, could
> you please use CBM instead of cbm.
OK; I had thought that we might be introducing a new inconsistency here
by making such a change, but looking at upstream, "CBM" is prevalent in
comments in the preexisting x86 code. I should have checked that before;
apologies for the unnecessary back-and-forth on this.
So, sure, it makes sense to change it.
Noted.
Cheers
---Dave
Powered by blists - more mailing lists