From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.9]) (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 4B5B457337 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2024 18:31:33 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.9 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1707503494; cv=none; b=l4eZC7mraw7zebISowJTfm9xkNIM7LClDaohxM98uKJm3WxLZO+zx8f1S9IV1JKuePhDqpjWhPhVVxv+Cg1TwMi5gBUZACkMbWcm/gNLORFNWDAL9Jr0BSFvA8mcLbJ3aJn/lE/8qkBap84rVkqDtP5ONyNUKCNYEOLV5TJ5WoM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1707503494; c=relaxed/simple; bh=M3/AQ82yfrpbo27RiP67TArS5rEkXNxRZ/v2g1yjKCs=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=fzHLKV+8aXaZOtQEsoW+GCCyX1IwGEUUFcJx3V03wAeSaJ3NYBlMElHoWPw4o5U4mJj1f8HRFIZ8S6rB7hY5/PyBtqQowHyMC63CXPUZFcEDidiBgCtzCPff2MJlHDydvOh3VCKSNHYfb34FD453GRHIgAqu+605VqW8O4jF4LQ= 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=Qerhjo/9; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.9 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="Qerhjo/9" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1707503493; x=1739039493; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=M3/AQ82yfrpbo27RiP67TArS5rEkXNxRZ/v2g1yjKCs=; b=Qerhjo/9H/w0C+GQyNyObD859krV5jFP8tMB15pGcVCFqXlkN0Ex4kbe wCrnKY1SPtn9t1sCI3yGMNbIgg5tBtD89opy5Uu/D3JCgKSC8P6oHrBSE E0BlEGYJJjI/TNkxBBHgaJUSUTXoBncZeAfrvjjO5/qAVoyu1wNwgib6Y D+BD+3rYGuE28UMZW3usjw5xy4ZgToiQ2Eq2eTqOERAzmfpreo7TiK01u Ycj6CTcvuoatXd6bNJJM+omtH0sm+59qSWNhgZKRkI4tX1a+/yv5/Yr0X ZTatIBymosouBTlGZgLQlflYQhEWfbhUaR8Iq8o9MNPpS2CAhU30ack4v g==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10979"; a="12211012" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.05,257,1701158400"; d="scan'208";a="12211012" Received: from orviesa007.jf.intel.com ([10.64.159.147]) by fmvoesa103.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 09 Feb 2024 10:31:33 -0800 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.05,257,1701158400"; d="scan'208";a="2297834" Received: from agluck-desk3.sc.intel.com (HELO agluck-desk3) ([172.25.222.74]) by orviesa007-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 09 Feb 2024 10:31:32 -0800 Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2024 10:31:30 -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 0/8] Add support for Sub-NUMA cluster (SNC) systems Message-ID: References: <20240126223837.21835-1-tony.luck@intel.com> <20240130222034.37181-1-tony.luck@intel.com> <91bd281e-e21f-4b60-9e73-2f14fcbec316@amd.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: patches@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <91bd281e-e21f-4b60-9e73-2f14fcbec316@amd.com> On Fri, Feb 09, 2024 at 09:27:56AM -0600, Moger, Babu wrote: > Hi Tony, > > On 1/30/24 16:20, Tony Luck wrote: > > This is the re-worked version of this series that I promised to post > > yesterday. Check that e-mail for the arguments for this alternate > > approach. > > To be honest, I like this series more than the previous series. I always > thought RDT_RESOURCE_L3_MON should have been a separate resource by itself. > > You need to separate the domain lists for RDT_RESOURCE_L3 and > RDT_RESOURCE_L3_MON if you are going this route. I didn't see that in this > series. Also I have few other comments as well. They are separated. Each "struct rdt_resource" has its own domain list. Or do you mean break up the struct rdt_domain into the control and monitor versions as was done in the previous series? > > Thanks > Babu >