From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Chao Peng <chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 03/13] x86: detect and initialize Intel
 CAT feature
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2015 17:39:33 +0800
Message-ID: <20150421093933.GA4453@pengc-linux.bj.intel.com>
References: <1429281230-4352-1-git-send-email-chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com>
	<1429281230-4352-4-git-send-email-chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com>
	<1429546392.18810.17.camel@citrix.com>
Reply-To: Chao Peng <chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1429546392.18810.17.camel@citrix.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Dario Faggioli <dario.faggioli@citrix.com>
Cc: keir@xen.org, Ian.Campbell@citrix.com, stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com, andrew.cooper3@citrix.com, Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com, xen-devel@lists.xen.org, will.auld@intel.com, JBeulich@suse.com, wei.liu2@citrix.com, dgdegra@tycho.nsa.gov
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 06:13:12PM +0200, Dario Faggioli wrote:
> On Fri, 2015-04-17 at 22:33 +0800, Chao Peng wrote:
> 
> > --- a/xen/arch/x86/psr.c
> > +++ b/xen/arch/x86/psr.c
> > @@ -19,14 +19,25 @@
> >  #include <asm/psr.h>
> >  
> >  #define PSR_CMT        (1<<0)
> > +#define PSR_CAT        (1<<1)
> > +
> > +struct psr_cat_socket_info {
> > +    bool_t initialized;
> > +    bool_t enabled;
> > +    unsigned int cbm_len;
> > +    unsigned int cos_max;
> > +};
> >
> Can't we ditch 'initialized' from within the struct and have a (global)
> bitmap, with one bit for each socket, expressing the same? And that also
> for 'enabled'.
> 
> It's probably, at least up to a certain extent, a matter of taste (and I
> personally think it will look better), but it also should produce
> tighter code...

NP, thanks.
Chao