From: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
To: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/resctrl: Preserve CDP enable over cpuhp
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2020 18:12:43 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <75bcb664-d840-96ed-c49f-34eefa010143@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1e1ee570-8deb-688e-1875-94b84eef7641@intel.com>
Hi Reinette,
On 13/02/2020 19:45, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> On 2/13/2020 9:42 AM, James Morse wrote:
>> On 12/02/2020 22:53, Reinette Chatre wrote:
>>> On 2/12/2020 10:53 AM, James Morse wrote:
>>>> mounted, and that cpus remember their CDP-enabled state over cpu
>>>> hotplug.
>>>>
>>>> This goes wrong when resctrl's CDP-enabled state changes while all
>>>> the cpus in a domain are offline.
>>>>
>>>> When a domain comes online, enable (or disable!) CDP to match resctrl's
>>>> current setting.
>> ... I think you're describing adding:
[...]
>> to rdtgroup.c and using that from core.c?
>
> If I understand this correctly the CDP configuration will be done twice
> for each CDP resource, and four times for each CDP resource on a system
> supporting both L2 and L3 CDP. I think it is possible to do
> configuration once for each. Also take care on systems that support MBA
> that would not be caught by the first if statement. A system supporting
> MBA and CDP may thus attempt the configuration even more. It should be
> possible to use the resource parameter for a positive test and then just
> let the other resources fall through? Considering this, what do you
> think of something like below?
>
> void rdt_domain_reconfigure_cdp(struct rdt_resource *r)
> {
> if (!r->alloc_capable)
> return;
>
> if (r == &rdt_resources_all[RDT_RESOURCE_L2DATA])
> l2_qos_cfg_update(&r->alloc_enabled);
>
> if (r == &rdt_resources_all[RDT_RESOURCE_L3DATA])
> l3_qos_cfg_update(&r->alloc_enabled);
> }
Sold!
(the !r->alloc_capable are already filtered out by the caller, but checking is the
least-surprise option)
I'll send a v2 shortly with your suggested-by. I'd like to keep the lockdep annotations as
the MPAM tree tries to stop the arch code taking the rdtgroup_mutex. Those patches
changing these annotations makes it nice and clear what is going on.
Thanks,
James
prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-02-14 18:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-02-12 18:53 [PATCH] x86/resctrl: Preserve CDP enable over cpuhp James Morse
2020-02-12 22:53 ` Reinette Chatre
2020-02-13 17:42 ` James Morse
2020-02-13 19:45 ` Reinette Chatre
2020-02-14 18:12 ` James Morse [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=75bcb664-d840-96ed-c49f-34eefa010143@arm.com \
--to=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=reinette.chatre@intel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.