From: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
To: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>
Cc: Fenghua Yu <fenghuay@nvidia.com>,
Maciej Wieczor-Retman <maciej.wieczor-retman@intel.com>,
Peter Newman <peternewman@google.com>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Babu Moger <babu.moger@amd.com>,
"Drew Fustini" <dfustini@baylibre.com>,
Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>, Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>,
David E Box <david.e.box@intel.com>, <x86@kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <patches@lists.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/7] fs/resctrl: Add interface to disable a monitor event
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 2026 16:10:59 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4af67f52-8188-45ba-982b-07c0dbcdc157@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <adVPqiY8NRQSR5Mw@agluck-desk3>
Hi Tony,
On 4/7/26 11:40 AM, Luck, Tony wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 06, 2026 at 02:13:19PM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
>> Hi Tony,
>>
>> On 4/6/26 11:35 AM, Luck, Tony wrote:
>>> On Fri, Apr 03, 2026 at 05:03:28PM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>
>>>
>>>> At this
>>>> time these scenarios may just fall into the "architecture must do the
>>>> right thing" category since it has best information on how state is
>>>> managed for the events as they are enabled/disabled.
>>>
>>> Are you suggesting to just drop the check for resctrl_mounted (as both
>>> a locking issue, and an incomplete solution)?
>>
>> I am indeed suggesting to "drop the check for resctrl_mounted" but instead
>> of "just" doing that I think it worthwhile to add function comments to these
>> two arch helpers in include/linux/resctrl.h that describes what needs to be
>> considered when calling them. That is, describe "architecture must do the
>> right thing" with some documentation about what needs to be considered.
>> Such documentation may help us to start putting some boundaries on how
>> these helpers can/should be used to help guide any future enhancements to
>> make this more robust.
>
> Something like this:
>
> /*
> * For events that require per-domain allocation, this routine must be called
Since all events are per-domain and all domains need allocation this is not clear.
(nit: it is not necessary to say "this routine" when the context is clearly
associated with the function).
I think referring to it as "per-domain state" is more accurate.
> * before CPU hot plug state begins allocating domain structures.
Architecture has some flexibility here if a resource is discovered after
initialization, like what AET does.
> * For other events the requirement is that the file system must not be
"For other events" -> "For all events"?
> * mounted when enabling events.
> */
> bool resctrl_enable_mon_event(enum resctrl_event_id eventid, bool any_cpu,
> unsigned int binary_bits, void *arch_priv)
Since resctrl has AET to thank for all the additional parameters and this is
another AET enhancement I think it would be appreciated if this be done properly.
Consider, for example:
/**
* resctrl_enable_mon_event() - Enable monitoring event
* @eventid: ID of the event
* @any_cpu: True if event data can be read from any CPU.
* @binary_bits:Number of binary places of the fixed-point value expected to
* back a floating point event. Can only be set for floating point
* events.
* @arch_priv: Architecture private data associated with event. Passed back to
* architecture when reading the event via resctrl_arch_rmid_read().
*
* The file system must not be mounted when enabling an event.
*
* Events that require per-domain (architectural and/or filesystem) state must
* be enabled before the domain structures are allocated. For example before
* CPU hotplug callbacks that allocate domain structures are registered. If the
* architecture discovers a resource after initialization it should enable
* events needing per-domain state before any domain structure allocation which
* should be coordinated with the CPU hotplug callbacks.
*
* Return:
* true if event was successfully enabled, false otherwise.
*/
bool resctrl_enable_mon_event(enum resctrl_event_id eventid, bool any_cpu,
unsigned int binary_bits, void *arch_priv)
>
> ...
>
> /*
> * This routine must not be called for events that require per-domain allcoation.
> * For other events the requirement is that the file system must not be
> * mounted when disabling events.
> */
> void resctrl_disable_mon_event(enum resctrl_event_id eventid)
>
Similar here. Please note the "allcoation"
Reinette
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-04-07 23:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-03-30 21:43 [PATCH v4 0/7] Allow AET to use PMT/TPMI as loadable modules Tony Luck
2026-03-30 21:43 ` [PATCH v4 1/7] platform/x86/intel/pmt: Export PMT enumeration functions as GPL Tony Luck
2026-04-04 0:00 ` Reinette Chatre
2026-04-06 18:07 ` David Box
2026-04-08 5:07 ` Christoph Hellwig
2026-04-08 17:01 ` Luck, Tony
2026-04-09 5:41 ` Christoph Hellwig
2026-03-30 21:43 ` [PATCH v4 2/7] x86/resctrl: Drop setting of event_group::force_off when insufficient RMIDs Tony Luck
2026-04-04 0:01 ` Reinette Chatre
2026-03-30 21:43 ` [PATCH v4 3/7] fs/resctrl: Add interface to disable a monitor event Tony Luck
2026-04-04 0:03 ` Reinette Chatre
2026-04-06 18:35 ` Luck, Tony
2026-04-06 21:13 ` Reinette Chatre
2026-04-07 18:40 ` Luck, Tony
2026-04-07 23:10 ` Reinette Chatre [this message]
2026-03-30 21:43 ` [PATCH v4 4/7] fs,x86/resctrl: Add architecture hooks for every mount/unmount Tony Luck
2026-04-04 0:52 ` Reinette Chatre
2026-04-06 20:35 ` Luck, Tony
2026-04-06 21:16 ` Reinette Chatre
2026-04-09 20:35 ` Luck, Tony
2026-04-10 15:16 ` Reinette Chatre
2026-04-10 18:59 ` Luck, Tony
2026-04-10 21:21 ` Reinette Chatre
2026-04-10 23:03 ` Luck, Tony
2026-03-30 21:43 ` [PATCH v4 5/7] x86/resctrl: Resolve PMT and TPMI symbols at runtime Tony Luck
2026-04-04 0:56 ` Reinette Chatre
2026-04-07 18:13 ` Luck, Tony
2026-04-07 18:40 ` Reinette Chatre
2026-04-07 20:33 ` Luck, Tony
2026-03-30 21:43 ` [PATCH v4 6/7] x86/resctrl: Delete intel_aet_exit() Tony Luck
2026-03-30 21:43 ` [PATCH v4 7/7] x86/resctrl: Downgrade dependency of AET on INTEL_PMT Tony Luck
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=4af67f52-8188-45ba-982b-07c0dbcdc157@intel.com \
--to=reinette.chatre@intel.com \
--cc=Dave.Martin@arm.com \
--cc=babu.moger@amd.com \
--cc=david.e.box@intel.com \
--cc=dfustini@baylibre.com \
--cc=fenghuay@nvidia.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maciej.wieczor-retman@intel.com \
--cc=patches@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=peternewman@google.com \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--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