[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <u7wdul44ca2cdquqbnnnvcffc2vcrg4yplm2krhupbrfruxkph@o2hc5obfonr6>
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2025 19:31:29 -0500
From: Aaron Tomlin <atomlin@...mlin.com>
To: "Moger, Babu" <bmoger@....com>
Cc: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
"Chatre, Reinette" <reinette.chatre@...el.com>, "Dave.Martin@....com" <Dave.Martin@....com>,
"james.morse@....com" <james.morse@....com>, "babu.moger@....com" <babu.moger@....com>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>, "mingo@...hat.com" <mingo@...hat.com>,
"bp@...en8.de" <bp@...en8.de>, "dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"sean@...e.io" <sean@...e.io>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] x86/resctrl: Add "*" shorthand to set minimum
io_alloc CBM for all domains
On Thu, Dec 18, 2025 at 03:56:24PM -0600, Moger, Babu wrote:
> > Why is io_alloc special? The same simple change could apply to
> > parse_line() to allow setting all domains in a resource to be set to
> > the same value:
Hi Tony, Babu,
> Yes. I am fine with that approach. Treat "*" equivalent for all the
> resources not just io_alloc.
No. While I appreciate the desire for a more uniform interface, I would
strongly suggest that this particular change remain applicable only to
io_alloc for the time being. If I recall correctly, the architectural
requirements for other resources differ enough that the suggested approach
may not be universally applicable or appropriate in every case, no?
Kind regards,
--
Aaron Tomlin
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (834 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists