[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <be20ffe1-ef8c-41fa-b359-9ebfaa326ebc@amd.com>
Date: Thu, 9 May 2024 17:34:02 -0500
From: "Moger, Babu" <babu.moger@....com>
To: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@...el.com>, corbet@....net,
fenghua.yu@...el.com, tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...hat.com, bp@...en8.de,
dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com
Cc: x86@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com, paulmck@...nel.org, rdunlap@...radead.org,
tj@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org, yanjiewtw@...il.com,
kim.phillips@....com, lukas.bulwahn@...il.com, seanjc@...gle.com,
jmattson@...gle.com, leitao@...ian.org, jpoimboe@...nel.org,
rick.p.edgecombe@...el.com, kirill.shutemov@...ux.intel.com,
jithu.joseph@...el.com, kai.huang@...el.com, kan.liang@...ux.intel.com,
daniel.sneddon@...ux.intel.com, pbonzini@...hat.com, sandipan.das@....com,
ilpo.jarvinen@...ux.intel.com, peternewman@...gle.com,
maciej.wieczor-retman@...el.com, linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, eranian@...gle.com, james.morse@....com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 03/17] x86/resctrl: Detect Assignable Bandwidth
Monitoring feature details
Hi Reinette,
On 5/7/24 15:27, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> Hi Babu,
>
> On 5/6/2024 12:09 PM, Moger, Babu wrote:
>> On 5/3/24 18:26, Reinette Chatre wrote:
>>> On 3/28/2024 6:06 PM, Babu Moger wrote:
>
> ...
>
>>>> + * @mbm_assign_cntrs: Maximum number of assignable counters
>>>> */
>>>> struct rdt_resource {
>>>> int rid;
>>>> @@ -188,6 +198,8 @@ struct rdt_resource {
>>>> struct list_head evt_list;
>>>> unsigned long fflags;
>>>> bool cdp_capable;
>>>> + bool mbm_assign_capable;
>>>> + u32 mbm_assign_cntrs;
>>>> };
>>>
>>> Please check tabs vs spaces (in this whole series please).
>>
>> Sure. Will do.
>>
>>>
>>> I'm thinking that a new "MBM specific" struct within
>>> struct rdt_resource will be helpful to clearly separate the MBM related
>>> data. This will be similar to struct resctrl_cache for
>>> cache allocation and struct resctrl_membw for memory bandwidth
>>> allocation.
>>
>> Did you mean to move all the fields for monitoring to move to new struct?
>>
>> Struct resctrl_mbm {
>> int num_rmid;
>> bool mbm_assign_capable;
>> u32 mbm_assign_cntrs;
>> }:
>>
>
> Indeed, so not actually MBM specific but monitoring specific as you state (with
> appropriate naming?). This is purely to help organize data within struct rdt_resource
> and (similar to struct resctrl_cache and struct resctrl_membw) not a new
> structure expected to be passed around. I think evt_list can also be a member.
How about this?
Lets keep assign_capable in main structure(like we have mon_capable) and
move rest of them into new structure.
Struct resctrl_mon {
int num_rmid;
struct list_head evt_list;
u32 num_assign_cntrs;
}:
--
Thanks
Babu Moger
Powered by blists - more mailing lists