From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2C88D31E822 for ; Fri, 5 Jun 2026 19:48:50 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1780688932; cv=none; b=ekS+eO26JXPHAYgPH8hh3dlnqZcHUwsH5CKUbD8Zo7/YuvvkI1p023ZUFrQoz7KYuraI0vJXsYjWjqVeGWTghsBpljLHLZUeKc3Lf5la3pAAmcIIez6oP7PrJh3vfvfXKuc9yI0Q7FVDGK6TtGfMrwikbHebPHOrsY3QCe5GCPI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1780688932; c=relaxed/simple; bh=tdj5HOyGsot40siV99/jxatBV/a+DHEDEqkJIsSaz1k=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=iFoWmGZQGPX2XT131SYblQodhUtdKyHMi97mqmwmdAcE/8c3gw2HLdhyWdag3zPhZo71aK0FDANT8P6/z+yLSp/Gp7I+gEbTOeiJqvMfWT4Q2BLxizlTCBLoquEk0/1lLFMp1KPuJ9CL0ViYkfxACn7W6jxJnHmIEDgNmMyAFYk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=XLDEdGqY; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="XLDEdGqY" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8E9751F00893; Fri, 5 Jun 2026 19:48:50 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1780688930; bh=SwLcgEoZX/zwta3ZyC7HjmQM/E17qcnyUa8V7i/hrVE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=XLDEdGqY8LtxPNBOhfY7WMg6P9A1Q5R4PgQs2HI+DiKxGNYQa65mUZeUiFOVzH4TX ck/Ug0sV/dae7gdz59xGEfNIEy0fZ97Wf3FEy9+jQ0Wz7LLG+NeireQiePcr/Qrmhy 6V+UPzeQq/Z65Xuq59Z0F3VqWbQrhzqARJ47jFxdV9E2twdvNt4pLhuS/7SQpoQIFL hQAjAbTR93yB+07cyl3xZRnYClFazNymGBaxJMo2ilx5LykDg8L1Qxp9ech9oWdNpR nB2O68pTFt7zLBpArlyIftEXGE5zw/7VGNNpgGY88mH1HWDd4Ap9T7Y1f8NaS4fy9y yOWzpSc4A1pfg== Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2026 12:48:49 -0700 From: Drew Fustini To: Reinette Chatre Cc: Tony Luck , Ben Horgan , James Morse , Dave Martin , Babu Moger , Fenghua Yu , Chen Yu , Borislav Petkov , Thomas Gleixner , Dave Hansen , Peter Newman , "x86@kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: [RFC] mpam,x86,fs/resctrl: Generic schema description Proof of Concept Message-ID: References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Thu, Jun 04, 2026 at 02:47:39PM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote: > > The ability to change scope is much needed for RISC-V. There are > > compromises in my RFC [1] as a result of trying to map everything to > > either L2 or L3 scope. > > > > I would also like to see a non-cpu cache scope for monitoring too, but > > would that be better discussed outside the context of this proof of > > concept? > > I also think it would be good for it to be clear that monitoring is based on > scope, not a resource. With the MB controls supporting different scope I do think > that this would be a good next step. A previous musing from me on this topic can > be found (at the end of ) https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/fb1e2686-237b-4536-acd6-15159abafcba@intel.com/ > > I have not yet considered how this can be built on top of this PoC though. Thanks for explaining. I like how how you show an example of mon_data/mon_NODE_00/mbm_total_bytes in that thread. I believe that sort of scheme would work well for RISc-V as a bandwidth controller implementing the CBQRI spec can be located anywhere within the system. Drew