From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C2CCC2BA19 for ; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 13:47:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.xenproject.org (lists.xenproject.org [192.237.175.120]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 694BB2074F for ; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 13:47:54 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (1024-bit key) header.d=citrix.com header.i=@citrix.com header.b="Q2kGFkP8" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 694BB2074F Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=citrix.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.xenproject.org) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1jOiO4-0005Th-Ve; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 13:47:32 +0000 Received: from all-amaz-eas1.inumbo.com ([34.197.232.57] helo=us1-amaz-eas2.inumbo.com) by lists.xenproject.org with esmtp (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1jOiO2-0005TZ-Vn for xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 13:47:31 +0000 X-Inumbo-ID: a615e36c-7f1f-11ea-8a50-12813bfff9fa Received: from esa3.hc3370-68.iphmx.com (unknown [216.71.145.155]) by us1-amaz-eas2.inumbo.com (Halon) with ESMTPS id a615e36c-7f1f-11ea-8a50-12813bfff9fa; Wed, 15 Apr 2020 13:47:30 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=citrix.com; s=securemail; t=1586958450; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=yUBYWgBvcCBEiFtZi4KYlWiNs/ExtQYAzVUtpY5TCXI=; b=Q2kGFkP8Zbn3VTerPB3rqraFulyDgjEUaH4ETJGR7fFuLozyEl9kwS71 +/ge3EksgK8+DvBhC7WQI/fmqIW+mydsKHvcFF2N4LgsSQoANQoO8W8e5 UKVs0Tn9bFF7rJfTyo7eroP+7A0UgXB5NAU3Hzp7+iUnieF4G1pnIgd8Y 4=; Authentication-Results: esa3.hc3370-68.iphmx.com; dkim=none (message not signed) header.i=none; spf=None smtp.pra=roger.pau@citrix.com; spf=Pass smtp.mailfrom=roger.pau@citrix.com; spf=None smtp.helo=postmaster@mail.citrix.com Received-SPF: None (esa3.hc3370-68.iphmx.com: no sender authenticity information available from domain of roger.pau@citrix.com) identity=pra; client-ip=162.221.158.21; receiver=esa3.hc3370-68.iphmx.com; envelope-from="roger.pau@citrix.com"; x-sender="roger.pau@citrix.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible Received-SPF: Pass (esa3.hc3370-68.iphmx.com: domain of roger.pau@citrix.com designates 162.221.158.21 as permitted sender) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=162.221.158.21; receiver=esa3.hc3370-68.iphmx.com; envelope-from="roger.pau@citrix.com"; x-sender="roger.pau@citrix.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible; x-record-type="v=spf1"; x-record-text="v=spf1 ip4:209.167.231.154 ip4:178.63.86.133 ip4:195.66.111.40/30 ip4:85.115.9.32/28 ip4:199.102.83.4 ip4:192.28.146.160 ip4:192.28.146.107 ip4:216.52.6.88 ip4:216.52.6.188 ip4:162.221.158.21 ip4:162.221.156.83 ip4:168.245.78.127 ~all" Received-SPF: None (esa3.hc3370-68.iphmx.com: no sender authenticity information available from domain of postmaster@mail.citrix.com) identity=helo; client-ip=162.221.158.21; receiver=esa3.hc3370-68.iphmx.com; envelope-from="roger.pau@citrix.com"; x-sender="postmaster@mail.citrix.com"; x-conformance=sidf_compatible IronPort-SDR: peEHnSpgsP5lzsl00C1ScIXEZwpEd47Ov3D29kI8RK90Ex6aHkSs0+gYSFrh8E7oYrAFpg3XDa LNvsiFAWizHgiIGxMD8vdDdhrZgpW8kKS17eBo/mH7JCKToXjpwWbZY+OlmgwVV81ozsa3Pf0a tZKcQpLKihU7QlPy5UXlp17vFLwsPKo/oZORIEcnVEOa3gFcXwwoUm+Z8gP5xiyPUXDV+KhNaG k7SrTK8xYl2ORD0JEKuptWxRg/b0NRLla1cce8P8wJdfGO4StX3TSar0cfTCGS8ALFClVzgDJZ rsU= X-SBRS: 2.7 X-MesageID: 15700282 X-Ironport-Server: esa3.hc3370-68.iphmx.com X-Remote-IP: 162.221.158.21 X-Policy: $RELAYED X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.72,387,1580792400"; d="scan'208";a="15700282" Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2020 15:47:22 +0200 From: Roger Pau =?utf-8?B?TW9ubsOp?= To: Ian Jackson Subject: Re: [PATCH OSSTEST 1/2] exanime: test for SMT and add a host flag Message-ID: <20200415134722.GL28601@Air-de-Roger> References: <20200415085246.7945-1-roger.pau@citrix.com> <24215.1635.613926.945930@mariner.uk.xensource.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <24215.1635.613926.945930@mariner.uk.xensource.com> X-ClientProxiedBy: AMSPEX02CAS01.citrite.net (10.69.22.112) To AMSPEX02CL02.citrite.net (10.69.22.126) X-BeenThere: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Xen developer discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: "xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org" Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xenproject.org Sender: "Xen-devel" On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 02:04:35PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote: > Roger Pau Monne writes ("[PATCH OSSTEST 1/2] exanime: test for SMT and add a host flag"): > > Check if hosts have SMT based on the number of threads per core. A > > value of threads per core different than 0 implies SMT support. > ... > > +logm("$ho->{Ident} threads per core: $threads"); > > +hostflag_putative_record($ho, "smt", !!$threads); > > This code LGTM but I wonder if it would be a good idea to start > namespacing these kind of hardware feature flags. cpu-*, hardware-*, > feature-* maybe ? Would you care to make a suggestion ? cpu-smt seems fine if we plan to do similar namespacing with other hardware features, I could see cpu-{smt,vmx,svm} and devices-{iommu,sriov,ats} or some such for example. If OTOH we don't want to be that fine grained I think hw-{smt,iommu,vmx,...} would also be fine. Not sure whether this has helped much. I guess my vote would be for cpu-smt namespace. Thanks, Roger.