From: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
To: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>, 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>,
Anil Keshavamurthy <anil.s.keshavamurthy@intel.com>,
Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
Cc: <x86@kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<patches@lists.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 01/31] x86,fs/resctrl: Drop rdt_mon_features variable
Date: Wed, 7 May 2025 20:28:56 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <eb141d41-25e2-4e8a-bfdb-6d3e6a4e542b@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250429003359.375508-2-tony.luck@intel.com>
Hi Tony,
On 4/28/25 5:33 PM, Tony Luck wrote:
> The fs/arch boundary is a little muddy for adding new monitor features.
It is not possible to accurately interpret what is meant with "little muddy".
Please add specific information that can be verified/reasoned about.
>
> Clean it up by making the mon_evt structure the source of all information
> about each event. In this case replace the bitmap of enabled monitor
> features with an "enabled" bit in the mon_evt structure.
bit -> boolean?
>
> Change architecture code to inform file system code which events are
> available on a system with resctrl_enable_mon_event().
(nit: no need to mention that a patch changes code, it should be implied.)
This could be, "An architecture uses resctrl_enable_mon_event() to inform
resctrl fs which events are enabled on the system."
(I think we need to be cautious about the "available" vs "enabled"
distinction.)
>
> Replace the event and architecture specific:
> resctrl_arch_is_llc_occupancy_enabled()
> resctrl_arch_is_mbm_total_enabled()
> resctrl_arch_is_mbm_local_enabled()
> functions with calls to resctrl_is_mon_event_enabled() with the
> appropriate QOS_L3_* enum resctrl_event_id.
No mention or motivation for the new array. I think the new array is an
improvement and now it begs the question whether rdt_resource::evt_list is
still needed? It seems to me that any usage of rdt_resource::evt_list can
use the new mon_event_all[] instead?
With struct mon_evt being independent like before this
patch it almost seems as though it prepared for multiple resources to
support the same event (do you know history here?). This appears to already
be thwarted by rdt_mon_features though ... although theoretically it could
have been "rdt_l3_mon_features".
Even so, with patch #4 adding the resource ID all event information is
centralized. Only potential issue may be if multiple resources use the
same event ... but since the existing event IDs already have resource
name embedded this does not seem to be of concern?
>
> Signed-off-by: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>
> ---
...
> @@ -866,14 +879,13 @@ static struct mon_evt mbm_local_event = {
> */
> static void l3_mon_evt_init(struct rdt_resource *r)
> {
> + enum resctrl_event_id evt;
> +
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&r->evt_list);
>
> - if (resctrl_arch_is_llc_occupancy_enabled())
> - list_add_tail(&llc_occupancy_event.list, &r->evt_list);
> - if (resctrl_arch_is_mbm_total_enabled())
> - list_add_tail(&mbm_total_event.list, &r->evt_list);
> - if (resctrl_arch_is_mbm_local_enabled())
> - list_add_tail(&mbm_local_event.list, &r->evt_list);
> + for (evt = 0; evt < QOS_NUM_EVENTS; evt++)
> + if (mon_event_all[evt].enabled)
> + list_add_tail(&mon_event_all[evt].list, &r->evt_list);
> }
This hunk can create confusion with it adding "all enabled events" to
a single resource. I understand that at this point only L3 supports monitoring
and this works ok, but in the context of this work it creates a caveat early
in series that needs to be fixed later (patch #4). This wrangling becomes
unnecessary if removing rdt_resource::evt_list.
Reinette
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-05-08 3:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 72+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-04-29 0:33 [PATCH v4 00/31] x86/resctrl telemetry monitoring Tony Luck
2025-04-29 0:33 ` [PATCH v4 01/31] x86,fs/resctrl: Drop rdt_mon_features variable Tony Luck
2025-05-08 3:28 ` Reinette Chatre [this message]
2025-05-08 18:32 ` Luck, Tony
2025-05-08 23:44 ` Reinette Chatre
2025-04-29 0:33 ` [PATCH v4 02/31] x86,fs/resctrl: Prepare for more monitor events Tony Luck
2025-05-08 3:30 ` Reinette Chatre
2025-05-09 15:02 ` Peter Newman
2025-04-29 0:33 ` [PATCH v4 03/31] fs/resctrl: Clean up rdtgroup_mba_mbps_event_{show,write}() Tony Luck
2025-05-08 3:31 ` Reinette Chatre
2025-04-29 0:33 ` [PATCH v4 04/31] fs/resctrl: Change how and when events are initialized Tony Luck
2025-05-08 3:31 ` Reinette Chatre
2025-04-29 0:33 ` [PATCH v4 05/31] fs/resctrl: Set up Kconfig options for telemetry events Tony Luck
2025-05-08 3:32 ` Reinette Chatre
2025-05-10 9:58 ` Chen, Yu C
2025-05-12 14:19 ` Luck, Tony
2025-04-29 0:33 ` [PATCH v4 06/31] x86/rectrl: Fake OOBMSM interface Tony Luck
2025-04-30 23:02 ` Luck, Tony
2025-05-08 3:33 ` Reinette Chatre
2025-04-29 0:33 ` [PATCH v4 07/31] x86,fs/resctrl: Improve domain type checking Tony Luck
2025-05-08 3:36 ` Reinette Chatre
2025-04-29 0:33 ` [PATCH v4 08/31] x86/resctrl: Move L3 initialization out of domain_add_cpu_mon() Tony Luck
2025-05-08 3:37 ` Reinette Chatre
2025-04-29 0:33 ` [PATCH v4 09/31] x86,fs/resctrl: Refactor domain_remove_cpu_mon() ready for new domain types Tony Luck
2025-05-08 3:37 ` Reinette Chatre
2025-04-29 0:33 ` [PATCH v4 10/31] x86/resctrl: Change generic monitor functions to use struct rdt_domain_hdr Tony Luck
2025-05-08 3:38 ` Reinette Chatre
2025-04-29 0:33 ` [PATCH v4 11/31] x86,fs/resctrl: Rename struct rdt_mon_domain and rdt_hw_mon_domain Tony Luck
2025-05-08 3:39 ` Reinette Chatre
2025-04-29 0:33 ` [PATCH v4 12/31] fs/resctrl: Improve handling for events that can be read from any CPU Tony Luck
2025-05-08 3:54 ` Reinette Chatre
2025-05-13 3:19 ` Chen, Yu C
2025-05-13 16:20 ` Luck, Tony
2025-05-14 9:11 ` Chen, Yu C
2025-04-29 0:33 ` [PATCH v4 13/31] fs/resctrl: Add support for additional monitor event display formats Tony Luck
2025-05-08 15:49 ` Reinette Chatre
2025-05-08 20:28 ` Luck, Tony
2025-05-08 23:45 ` Reinette Chatre
2025-05-09 11:29 ` Dave Martin
2025-05-09 14:46 ` Peter Newman
2025-05-09 16:38 ` Luck, Tony
2025-05-09 16:43 ` Dave Martin
2025-04-29 0:33 ` [PATCH v4 14/31] fs/resctrl: Add an architectural hook called for each mount Tony Luck
2025-05-08 15:50 ` Reinette Chatre
2025-04-29 0:33 ` [PATCH v4 15/31] x86/resctrl: Add and initialize rdt_resource for package scope core monitor Tony Luck
2025-05-08 15:50 ` Reinette Chatre
2025-04-29 0:33 ` [PATCH v4 16/31] x86/resctrl: Add first part of telemetry event enumeration Tony Luck
2025-05-08 15:53 ` Reinette Chatre
2025-04-29 0:33 ` [PATCH v4 17/31] x86/resctrl: Add second " Tony Luck
2025-05-08 15:54 ` Reinette Chatre
2025-04-29 0:33 ` [PATCH v4 18/31] x86/resctrl: Add third " Tony Luck
2025-05-08 15:56 ` Reinette Chatre
2025-04-29 0:33 ` [PATCH v4 19/31] x86,fs/resctrl: Fill in details of Clearwater Forest events Tony Luck
2025-05-08 15:54 ` Reinette Chatre
2025-04-29 0:33 ` [PATCH v4 20/31] x86/resctrl: Check for adequate MMIO space Tony Luck
2025-05-08 15:56 ` Reinette Chatre
2025-04-29 0:33 ` [PATCH v4 21/31] x86/resctrl: Add fourth part of telemetry event enumeration Tony Luck
2025-05-08 15:56 ` Reinette Chatre
2025-04-29 0:33 ` [PATCH v4 22/31] x86/resctrl: Read core telemetry events Tony Luck
2025-05-08 15:57 ` Reinette Chatre
2025-04-29 0:33 ` [PATCH v4 23/31] x86,fs/resctrl: Handle domain creation/deletion for RDT_RESOURCE_PERF_PKG Tony Luck
2025-05-08 15:58 ` Reinette Chatre
2025-04-29 0:33 ` [PATCH v4 24/31] fs/resctrl: Add type define for PERF_PKG files Tony Luck
2025-04-29 0:33 ` [PATCH v4 25/31] x86/resctrl: Final steps to enable RDT_RESOURCE_PERF_PKG Tony Luck
2025-04-29 0:33 ` [PATCH v4 26/31] x86/resctrl: Add energy/perf choices to rdt boot option Tony Luck
2025-05-08 15:58 ` Reinette Chatre
2025-04-29 0:33 ` [PATCH v4 27/31] x86/resctrl: Handle number of RMIDs supported by telemetry resources Tony Luck
2025-05-08 15:59 ` Reinette Chatre
2025-04-29 0:33 ` [PATCH v4 28/31] x86,fs/resctrl: Fix RMID allocation for multiple monitor resources Tony Luck
2025-04-29 0:33 ` [PATCH v4 29/31] fs/resctrl: Add interface for per-resource debug info files Tony Luck
2025-04-29 0:33 ` [PATCH v4 30/31] x86/resctrl: Add info/PERF_PKG_MON/status file Tony Luck
2025-04-29 0:33 ` [PATCH v4 31/31] x86/resctrl: Update Documentation for package events 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=eb141d41-25e2-4e8a-bfdb-6d3e6a4e542b@intel.com \
--to=reinette.chatre@intel.com \
--cc=Dave.Martin@arm.com \
--cc=anil.s.keshavamurthy@intel.com \
--cc=babu.moger@amd.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).