Re: [PATCH RFC 08/19] RISC-V: QoS: add resctrl interface for CBQRI controllers

From: Drew Fustini <fustini@kernel.org>
To: guo.wenjia23@zte.com.cn
Cc: dave.martin@arm.com, acpica-devel@lists.linux.dev, alex@ghiti.fr,
	aou@eecs.berkeley.edu, aricciardi@baylibre.com,
	atish.patra@linux.dev, atishp@rivosinc.com, babu.moger@amd.com,
	ben.horgan@arm.com, conor+dt@kernel.org,
	cp0613@linux.alibaba.com, cuiyunhui@bytedance.com,
	devicetree@vger.kernel.org, fenghua.yu@intel.com,
	james.morse@arm.com, krzk+dt@kernel.org, lenb@kernel.org,
	linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, liu.qingtao2@zte.com.cn,
	liwei1518@gmail.com, mindal@semihalf.com, npitre@baylibre.com,
	palmer@dabbelt.com, paul.walmsley@sifive.com,
	peternewman@google.com, pjw@kernel.org, rafael@kernel.org,
	reinette.chatre@intel.com, rkrcmar@ventanamicro.com,
	robert.moore@intel.com, robh@kernel.org,
	samuel.holland@sifive.com, sunilvl@ventanamicro.com,
	tony.luck@intel.com, vasu@rivosinc.com, ved@rivosinc.com,
	x86@kernel.org, zhiwei_liu@linux.alibaba.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 08/19] RISC-V: QoS: add resctrl interface for CBQRI controllers
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2026 22:57:54 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <actiYi6ACcOrvz9J@gen8> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <202603261113.62QBDn8T007047@mse-db.zte.com.cn>

On Thu, Mar 26, 2026 at 07:05:48PM +0800, guo.wenjia23@zte.com.cn wrote:
> Hi Drew,
> 
> On Thu, Jan 29, 2026 at 4:28 AM Drew Fustini <fustini@kernel.org> wrote:>
> > Add interface for CBQRI controller drivers to make use of the resctrl
> > filesystem.
> >
> > Co-developed-by: Adrien Ricciardi <aricciardi@baylibre.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Adrien Ricciardi <aricciardi@baylibre.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Drew Fustini <fustini@kernel.org>
> > ---
> >  arch/riscv/kernel/qos/qos_resctrl.c | 1192 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 1192 insertions(+)
> >
> > ...
> >
> > +
> > +int resctrl_arch_update_one(struct rdt_resource *r, struct rdt_ctrl_domain *d,
> > +                           u32 closid, enum resctrl_conf_type t, u32 cfg_val)
> > +{
> > +       struct cbqri_controller *ctrl;
> > +       struct cbqri_resctrl_dom *dom;
> > +       struct cbqri_config cfg;
> > +       int err = 0;
> > +
> > +       dom = container_of(d, struct cbqri_resctrl_dom, resctrl_ctrl_dom);
> > +       ctrl = dom->hw_ctrl;
> > +
> > +       if (!r->alloc_capable)
> > +               return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > +       switch (r->rid) {
> > +       case RDT_RESOURCE_L2:
> > +       case RDT_RESOURCE_L3:
> > +               cfg.cbm = cfg_val;
> > +               err = cbqri_apply_cache_config(dom, closid, t, &cfg);
> > +               break;
> > +       case RDT_RESOURCE_MBA:
> > +               /* covert from percentage to bandwidth blocks */
> > +               cfg.rbwb = cfg_val * ctrl->bc.nbwblks / 100;
> 
> Should use bc.mrbwb to calculate rbwb? 
> I think bc.nbwblks represent the available bw blks in the controller.
> It should should decrease as they are allocated.

The resctrl MBA resource is supposed to be the percentage of total
memory bandwidth. nbwblks is the total number of bandwidth blocks, so I
think the existing calucation is correct.

From the example SoC configuration, the number of bandwidth blocks is
1024, and mrbwb is meant to be 80% of nbwblks which is 819.

Setting MB to 80% in schemata would yield: 80 * 1024 / 100 = 819

Thanks,
Drew