From: Fenghua Yu <fenghuay@nvidia.com>
To: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>, Ben Horgan <ben.horgan@arm.com>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>,
Shaopeng Tan <tan.shaopeng@fujitsu.com>,
Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>, Babu Moger <babu.moger@amd.com>,
Drew Fustini <fustini@kernel.org>,
Vikram Sethi <vsethi@nvidia.com>,
Shanker Donthineni <sdonthineni@nvidia.com>,
Newton Liu <newtonl@nvidia.com>, Gavin Shan <gshan@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
Fenghua Yu <fenghuay@nvidia.com>
Subject: [PATCH 04/23] resctrl: Expose per-control status in resource_schemata
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2026 14:02:54 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260716210329.2914625-4-fenghuay@nvidia.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cover.1784217438.git.fenghuay@nvidia.com>
Emulated MB controls can be individually present or absent depending on
what the underlying MSC advertises, but user space has no way to tell
which controls under resource_schemata are actually backed by hardware.
Track this per control and expose it as a read-only "status" file for
scalar controls, reporting "enabled" or "disabled". The state is stored
as resctrl_membw::no_mbw_hw, which defaults to false so every control is
reported "enabled" (hardware-backed) unless an architecture explicitly
marks it as lacking MBW hardware of its own. This keeps the common case
correct on all architectures with no per-arch initialization code.
This commit only adds the generic field, the "status" file, and the
default (hardware-backed) reporting. No architecture writes no_mbw_hw
yet, so every control reports "enabled" until a backend sets it. On
MPAM the field is assigned for the emulated, hardware-less MB control in
a later patch that adds the node-scoped MB_NODE control.
Signed-off-by: Fenghua Yu <fenghuay@nvidia.com>
---
fs/resctrl/rdtgroup.c | 17 +++++++++++++++++
include/linux/resctrl.h | 4 ++++
2 files changed, 21 insertions(+)
diff --git a/fs/resctrl/rdtgroup.c b/fs/resctrl/rdtgroup.c
index 6b1f24c6a1f2..a3aad9b1ff6e 100644
--- a/fs/resctrl/rdtgroup.c
+++ b/fs/resctrl/rdtgroup.c
@@ -2318,6 +2318,16 @@ static int resctrl_ctrl_unit_show(struct kernfs_open_file *of,
return 0;
}
+static int resctrl_ctrl_status_show(struct kernfs_open_file *of,
+ struct seq_file *seq, void *v)
+{
+ struct resctrl_ctrl *ctrl = rdt_kn_parent_priv(of->kn);
+
+ seq_printf(seq, "%s\n", ctrl->membw.no_mbw_hw ? "disabled" : "enabled");
+
+ return 0;
+}
+
static struct rftype ctrl_files[] = {
{
.name = "scope",
@@ -2375,6 +2385,13 @@ static struct rftype ctrl_files[] = {
.seq_show = resctrl_ctrl_unit_show,
.fflags = BIT(RESCTRL_CTRL_SCALAR),
},
+ {
+ .name = "status",
+ .mode = 0444,
+ .kf_ops = &rdtgroup_kf_single_ops,
+ .seq_show = resctrl_ctrl_status_show,
+ .fflags = BIT(RESCTRL_CTRL_SCALAR),
+ },
};
static int resctrl_add_ctrl_files(struct kernfs_node *kn, struct resctrl_ctrl *ctrl)
diff --git a/include/linux/resctrl.h b/include/linux/resctrl.h
index 4fc41e269d0b..5d8ea12ae16b 100644
--- a/include/linux/resctrl.h
+++ b/include/linux/resctrl.h
@@ -289,6 +289,9 @@ enum resctrl_ctrl_mode {
* "all" for a proportional schema. Base unit of an
* absolute control, for example "GBps".
* @mba_sc: True if MBA software controller(mba_sc) is enabled
+ * @no_mbw_hw: True if the control has no MBW (mbw_max) hardware of its
+ * own. Defaults to false (hardware-backed); architectures
+ * set this for emulated controls that lack hardware.
*
* With a control value "C" written to the schemata file, min_bw <= C <= max_bw,
* the amount of resource allocated by this control is:
@@ -303,6 +306,7 @@ struct resctrl_membw {
u32 scale;
enum resctrl_ctrl_unit unit;
bool mba_sc;
+ bool no_mbw_hw;
};
enum resctrl_scope {
--
2.43.0
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-07-16 21:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-07-16 21:02 [PATCH RFC 00/23] resctrl: MBA control emulation and ARM MPAM MB_NODE support Fenghua Yu
2026-07-16 21:02 ` [PATCH 01/23] resctrl: Fix ownership of resource_schemata control subdirectories Fenghua Yu
2026-07-16 21:02 ` [PATCH 02/23] arm_mpam: Fix NULL address access issue Fenghua Yu
2026-07-16 21:02 ` [PATCH 03/23] resctrl: Expose MBA resource_schemata mode sysfs Fenghua Yu
2026-07-16 21:02 ` Fenghua Yu [this message]
2026-07-16 21:02 ` [PATCH 05/23] resctrl: Add nested resource_schemata support for emulated controls Fenghua Yu
2026-07-16 21:02 ` [PATCH 06/23] resctrl: Mirror schemata for controls without MBW hardware Fenghua Yu
2026-07-16 21:02 ` [PATCH 07/23] resctrl: Rebuild resource_schemata subdirs on MBA mode change Fenghua Yu
2026-07-16 21:02 ` [PATCH 08/23] Documentation: resctrl: document MBA control emulation Fenghua Yu
2026-07-16 21:02 ` [PATCH 09/23] resctrl: De-hardcode L3 monitor infrastructure Fenghua Yu
2026-07-16 21:03 ` [PATCH 10/23] resctrl: Expose MBA MBM counter assignment sysfs Fenghua Yu
2026-07-16 21:03 ` [PATCH 11/23] resctrl: name node-scoped monitor domains mon_NODE_<id> Fenghua Yu
2026-07-16 21:03 ` [PATCH 12/23] resctrl: Add node-scope MBM total event Fenghua Yu
2026-07-16 21:03 ` [PATCH 13/23] resctrl: Make MBM paths resource-aware Fenghua Yu
2026-07-16 21:03 ` [PATCH 14/23] arm_mpam: Support memory-level MSCs and ABMC per class Fenghua Yu
2026-07-16 21:03 ` [PATCH 15/23] arm_mpam: Refine L3 topology and class selection Fenghua Yu
2026-07-16 21:03 ` [PATCH 16/23] arm_mpam: Include all MSC components during domain setup Fenghua Yu
2026-07-16 21:03 ` [PATCH 17/23] arm_mpam: Handle CPU-less numa nodes Fenghua Yu
2026-07-16 21:03 ` [PATCH 18/23] arm_mpam: Emulate MB control with node-scoped MB_NODE control Fenghua Yu
2026-07-16 21:03 ` [PATCH 19/23] Documentation: arm64: mpam: document memory-level MB control and NUMA nodes Fenghua Yu
2026-07-16 21:03 ` [PATCH 20/23] Documentation: resctrl: document NODE-scoped MBA domains and mon_NODE monitoring Fenghua Yu
2026-07-16 21:03 ` [PATCH 21/23] Documentation: resctrl: document MB_NODE emulation example on ARM MPAM Fenghua Yu
2026-07-16 21:03 ` [PATCH 22/23] arm_mpam: Add KUnit test for CPU-less NUMA node affinity Fenghua Yu
2026-07-16 21:03 ` [PATCH 23/23] selftests/resctrl: Add MB emulation test for ARM MPAM Fenghua Yu
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=20260716210329.2914625-4-fenghuay@nvidia.com \
--to=fenghuay@nvidia.com \
--cc=Dave.Martin@arm.com \
--cc=babu.moger@amd.com \
--cc=ben.horgan@arm.com \
--cc=fustini@kernel.org \
--cc=gshan@redhat.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=newtonl@nvidia.com \
--cc=reinette.chatre@intel.com \
--cc=sdonthineni@nvidia.com \
--cc=tan.shaopeng@fujitsu.com \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=vsethi@nvidia.com \
--cc=yu.c.chen@intel.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox