Re: [External] [PATCH RFC v2 06/17] RISC-V: QoS: define CBQRI resctrl resources and domains

[Drew Fustini <fustini@kernel.org>]

On Thu, Mar 26, 2026 at 04:32:47PM +0800, yunhui cui wrote:
> Hi Drew，
> 
> On Wed, Mar 25, 2026 at 2:49 PM Drew Fustini <fustini@kernel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 25, 2026 at 10:31:39AM +0800, yunhui cui wrote:
> > > Hi Drew,
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jan 29, 2026 at 4:28 AM Drew Fustini <fustini@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Define data structures to encapsulate the resctrl resource
> > > > and domain structures.
> > > >
> > > > Co-developed-by: Adrien Ricciardi <aricciardi@baylibre.com>
> > > > Signed-off-by: Adrien Ricciardi <aricciardi@baylibre.com>
> > > > [fustini: rebased current upstream]
> > > > Signed-off-by: Drew Fustini <fustini@kernel.org>
> > > > ---
> > > >  arch/riscv/kernel/qos/internal.h | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > >  1 file changed, 27 insertions(+)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/qos/internal.h b/arch/riscv/kernel/qos/internal.h
> > > > index ff2c7eff50be..c0402dd06cfa 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/qos/internal.h
> > > > +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/qos/internal.h
> > > > @@ -65,6 +65,11 @@
> > > >  #define CBQRI_BC_ALLOC_CTL_OP_READ_LIMIT   2
> > > >  #define CBQRI_BC_ALLOC_CTL_STATUS_SUCCESS  1
> > > >
> > > > +int qos_resctrl_setup(void);
> > > > +void qos_resctrl_exit(void);
> > > > +int qos_resctrl_online_cpu(unsigned int cpu);
> > > > +int qos_resctrl_offline_cpu(unsigned int cpu);
> > > > +
> > > >  /* Capacity Controller hardware capabilities */
> > > >  struct riscv_cbqri_capacity_caps {
> > > >         u16 ncblks; /* number of capacity blocks */
> > > > @@ -125,4 +130,26 @@ struct cbqri_controller {
> > > >         bool mon_capable;
> > > >  };
> > > >
> > > > +struct cbqri_resctrl_res {
> > > > +       struct rdt_resource     resctrl_res;
> > > > +       struct cbqri_controller controller;
> > > > +       u32 max_rcid;
> > > > +       u32 max_mcid;
> > > > +};
> > > > +
> > > > +struct cbqri_resctrl_dom {
> > > > +       struct rdt_domain_hdr       resctrl_dom_hdr;
> > > > +       struct rdt_ctrl_domain  resctrl_ctrl_dom;
> > > > +       struct rdt_mon_domain   resctrl_mon_dom;
> > > > +       u64 cbm;
> > > > +       u64 rbwb;
> > > > +       u64 *ctrl_val;
> > > > +       struct cbqri_controller *hw_ctrl;
> > > > +};
> > > > +
> > >
> > > Can we trim down some fields? For example:
> > >  struct cbqri_resctrl_res {
> > >         struct rdt_resource     resctrl_res;
> > > -       struct cbqri_controller controller;
> > >         u32 max_rcid;
> > >         u32 max_mcid;
> > >  };
> > >
> > >  struct cbqri_resctrl_dom {
> > > -       struct rdt_domain_hdr       resctrl_dom_hdr;
> > >         struct rdt_ctrl_domain  resctrl_ctrl_dom;
> > >         struct rdt_mon_domain   resctrl_mon_dom;
> > > -       u64 cbm;
> > > -       u64 rbwb;
> > >         u64 *ctrl_val;
> > >         struct cbqri_controller *hw_ctrl;
> > >  };
> >
> > Can you explain why you don't think these are needed??
> 
> The functionality works well without those fields, feel free to try.

Thanks for pointing this out. I have removed them.

> Btw, when do you plan to send the next revision?

The current branch is based on 6.19 so I need to rebase. I have
addressesd most of the feedback so far except for tracking default
closid/rmid for a cpu. I am thinking I should send a new version as it
has been a long time and describe the open items that I have not solved
yet.

Thanks,
Drew