Re: [PATCH 00/11] x86,fs/resctrl: Improve resctrl quality and consistency

Ben Horgan
2026-03-19T17:18:48Z

Hi Reinette,

On 3/19/26 16:18, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> Hi Ben,
>
> On 3/19/26 2:53 AM, Ben Horgan wrote:
>> Hi Reinette,
>>
>> On 3/18/26 20:12, Reinette Chatre wrote:
>>> Hi Ben,
>>>
>>> On 3/18/26 10:10 AM, Ben Horgan wrote:
>>>> On 3/18/26 16:35, Reinette Chatre wrote:
[...]
>>
>> We've discussed two changes, one is adding a truncation message to last_cmd_status and the other
>> is carrying on after failure when allocating counters. Are you going to take these from here or would
>> you like patches from me?
>
> Adding the truncation message to last_cmd_status seems to complement the other last_cmd_status
> improvements in this series. I'd be happy to create the patch and include it as part of this
> series.
>
> I would like to confirm behavior when encountering error when allocating counters though:
> My previous assessment of rdtgroup_assign_cntr_event() callers was incomplete since it is also
> called with NULL domain when the user uses the "*=<assignment state>" syntax to mbm_L3_assignments.
> This is a different scenario from directory creation since it passes the error back to
> user space. While here it may also be ok to carry on after a counter could not be allocated in
> one domain I do think that user space should still learn via error return that not all allocations
> succeeded.

Thanks for pointing this out, I'd missed it too.

>
> Even so, to answer your original question, please create the patches that change the allocation
> behavior. This seems to complement the work you are currently doing and would be easy for you to test
> (I do not have access to assignable mode hardware).

Ok, will do.

Thanks,

Ben

>
> Thank you.
>
> Reinette
>