[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <502228b9-ecc9-4c2a-b268-a51fc14d4c1e@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2025 14:49:32 -0700
From: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@...el.com>
To: Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>, Fenghua Yu <fenghuay@...dia.com>, "Maciej
Wieczor-Retman" <maciej.wieczor-retman@...el.com>, Peter Newman
<peternewman@...gle.com>, James Morse <james.morse@....com>, Babu Moger
<babu.moger@....com>, Drew Fustini <dfustini@...libre.com>, Dave Martin
<Dave.Martin@....com>, Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@...el.com>
CC: <x86@...nel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
<patches@...ts.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 03/28] x86,fs/resctrl: Refactor
domain_remove_cpu_mon() ready for new domain types
Hi Tony,
On 9/12/25 3:10 PM, Tony Luck wrote:
> All monitoring events are associated with the L3 resource.
Above sentence can be dropped.
>
> The RDT_RESOURCE_L3 resource carries a lot of state in the domain
> structures which needs to be dealt with when a domain is taken offline
> by removing the last CPU in the domain.
>
> New telemetry events will be associated with a new package scoped
> resource with new domain structures.
Above is intended to be problem statement but the problem is unclear without
connection how the solution below solves it.
>
> Refactor domain_remove_cpu_mon() so all the L3 processing is separate
> from general actions of clearing the CPU bit in the mask and removing
> sub-directories from the mon_data directory.
Can "and removing sub-directories from the mon_data directory" now be dropped
to match the change made to this patch?
>
> Signed-off-by: Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>
> ---
Reinette
Powered by blists - more mailing lists