From: "Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com>
To: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
Cc: linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, "Shuah Khan" <shuah@kernel.org>,
"Babu Moger" <babu.moger@amd.com>,
"Maciej Wieczór-Retman" <maciej.wieczor-retman@intel.com>,
"Fenghua Yu" <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/13] selftests/resctrl: Convert get_mem_bw_imc() fd close to for loop
Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2024 13:59:17 +0200 (EET) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a263ee49-b987-90e2-c794-4d2af0ce50ca@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <832ec5e1-db5c-4123-8768-39ba9e6cca82@intel.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 826 bytes --]
On Tue, 19 Mar 2024, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> On 3/11/2024 6:52 AM, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
> > The open() side handles fds in a for loop but close() is based on two
> > fixed indexes READ and WRITE.
> >
> > Match the close() side with the open() side by using for loop for
> > consistency.
>
> I find the close() side to be more appropriate. I say this for two
> reasons: (a) looking at the close() calls as they are now it is
> obvious what the close() applies to and transitioning to a loop
> adds a layer of unnecessary indirection, (b) I do not think a loop
> is appropriate for the READ/WRITE define that just happen to be 0
> and 1 ... there should not be an assumption about their underlying
> value.
Hi,
So to confirm are you suggesting I should remove all the other loops
instead?
--
i.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-03-22 11:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-03-11 13:52 [PATCH v2 00/13] selftests/resctrl: resctrl_val() related cleanups & improvements Ilpo Järvinen
2024-03-11 13:52 ` [PATCH v2 01/13] selftests/resctrl: Convert get_mem_bw_imc() fd close to for loop Ilpo Järvinen
2024-03-20 4:50 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-03-22 11:59 ` Ilpo Järvinen [this message]
2024-03-22 12:00 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2024-03-11 13:52 ` [PATCH v2 02/13] selftests/resctrl: Calculate resctrl FS derived mem bw over sleep(1) only Ilpo Järvinen
2024-03-20 4:53 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-03-22 12:11 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2024-03-22 17:44 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-03-25 13:08 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2024-03-11 13:52 ` [PATCH v2 03/13] selftests/resctrl: Consolidate get_domain_id() into resctrl_val() Ilpo Järvinen
2024-03-11 13:52 ` [PATCH v2 04/13] selftests/resctrl: Use correct type for pids Ilpo Järvinen
2024-03-11 13:52 ` [PATCH v2 05/13] selftests/resctrl: Cleanup bm_pid and ppid usage & limit scope Ilpo Järvinen
2024-03-11 13:52 ` [PATCH v2 06/13] selftests/resctrl: Rename measure_vals() to measure_mem_bw_vals() & document Ilpo Järvinen
2024-03-11 13:52 ` [PATCH v2 07/13] selftests/resctrl: Add ->measure() callback to resctrl_val_param Ilpo Järvinen
2024-03-11 13:52 ` [PATCH v2 08/13] selftests/resctrl: Add ->init() callback into resctrl_val_param Ilpo Järvinen
2024-03-13 10:15 ` Maciej Wieczor-Retman
2024-03-13 10:28 ` Maciej Wieczor-Retman
2024-03-13 11:37 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2024-03-13 13:53 ` Maciej Wieczor-Retman
2024-03-13 13:59 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2024-03-14 16:07 ` Maciej Wieczor-Retman
2024-03-14 16:09 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2024-03-20 4:58 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-03-22 12:22 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2024-03-11 13:52 ` [PATCH v2 09/13] selftests/resctrl: Simplify bandwidth report type handling Ilpo Järvinen
2024-03-11 13:52 ` [PATCH v2 10/13] selftests/resctrl: Make some strings passed to resctrlfs functions const Ilpo Järvinen
2024-03-11 13:52 ` [PATCH v2 11/13] selftests/resctrl: Convert ctrlgrp & mongrp to pointers Ilpo Järvinen
2024-03-20 15:20 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-03-22 12:30 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2024-03-22 17:44 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-03-25 13:14 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2024-03-11 13:52 ` [PATCH v2 12/13] selftests/resctrl: Remove mongrp from MBA test Ilpo Järvinen
2024-03-11 13:52 ` [PATCH v2 13/13] selftests/resctrl: Remove test name comparing from write_bm_pid_to_resctrl() Ilpo Järvinen
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=a263ee49-b987-90e2-c794-4d2af0ce50ca@linux.intel.com \
--to=ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=babu.moger@amd.com \
--cc=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maciej.wieczor-retman@intel.com \
--cc=reinette.chatre@intel.com \
--cc=shuah@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.