From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.21]) (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 8FBB07F48F; Fri, 9 Feb 2024 19:23:46 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.21 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1707506628; cv=none; b=VQ1b4r8Cso1NXgOXu2hl+b8WOKbPeI6VcETqujGYZbnWH/+0LbzHBzjdUqGxE9yaRku/aQ/PD/CzD+pRJveZMpPV4gCqRb4p1SjFJUZ+s1ki+i4/xnek4/STFcpBVKKwhkpFotXwovkgXukYzTEdh+vF8vzjFHtpVgsiOb8PXKU= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1707506628; c=relaxed/simple; bh=WC9tRxWrrOmUk1nUbdcPHKUUN+d2WwGkjgKMha0qJoc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=G53OOqAcvYiS4lr8EBxgU+yvUWLLTRtbVTvUUMKTrNin9fiTgJZAnNWPZwcgUOpQaV9niszv9hpeWHZhFMHQ1bzoXG4kxheA8p2MEagPtNHMUAfski5ABxIhcD0dtM1ncQXmEVYEIFFCNaX+j83m0xykldCYw5BswZKuabBcv/U= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=ZbcER6GM; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.21 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="ZbcER6GM" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1707506627; x=1739042627; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=WC9tRxWrrOmUk1nUbdcPHKUUN+d2WwGkjgKMha0qJoc=; b=ZbcER6GMB12IJCFECEDP+DhN/nfiRdaaVJQX2YYIErrhjiaoDfeJ7xhc 3MioLNIrUx/MwHL+qK2gut8YGs9a4DgPCadutjG3OQGypuriLh8NoVnmv vrXGnJRfxt3+JRlA5BEOuggfIzqV0hEcr3d5wr3GtN8KaId58qDQNFluy pCMSIyspRDPwyBTCIp1g/kIpYN1/urAD9Q+xD7mWZLHF1c3oXsmYczMGL BoqXVfPfIVD/2JJh38l4Fs8EbrbGaIRdZN6e07Mr4mx3789J5cS0tACLE AoEtOYXNxiuxx8EeamleGwuZR1r84lnmk0XPEwX+P7JLuTFPZ09+I6/bm w==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10979"; a="1395672" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.05,257,1701158400"; d="scan'208";a="1395672" Received: from orviesa001.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.141]) by orvoesa113.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 09 Feb 2024 11:23:46 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.05,257,1701158400"; d="scan'208";a="39452963" Received: from agluck-desk3.sc.intel.com (HELO agluck-desk3) ([172.25.222.74]) by smtpauth.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 09 Feb 2024 11:23:46 -0800 Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2024 11:23:44 -0800 From: Tony Luck To: "Moger, Babu" Cc: Fenghua Yu , Reinette Chatre , Peter Newman , Jonathan Corbet , Shuah Khan , x86@kernel.org, Shaopeng Tan , James Morse , Jamie Iles , Randy Dunlap , Drew Fustini , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, patches@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [PATCH v15-RFC 5/8] x86/resctrl: Add "NODE" as an option for resource scope Message-ID: References: <20240126223837.21835-1-tony.luck@intel.com> <20240130222034.37181-1-tony.luck@intel.com> <20240130222034.37181-6-tony.luck@intel.com> <6628954f-c7e9-4040-9f03-7b5b6a6d082d@amd.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@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: <6628954f-c7e9-4040-9f03-7b5b6a6d082d@amd.com> On Fri, Feb 09, 2024 at 09:29:03AM -0600, Moger, Babu wrote: > Hi Tony, > > This patch probably needs to be merged with with patch 7. If it just added RESCTRL_NODE to the enum and the switch() I'd agree (as patch 7 is where RESCTRL_NODE first used). But this patch also adds the sanity checks on scope where it has to be a cache level. Patch 7 is already on the big side (119 lines added to core.c). If you really think this series needs to cut back the number of patches, I could move the sanity check pieces from here to patch 3 (where the enum is introduced) and just the RESCTRL_NODE bits to patch 7. -Tony