From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S933325AbdCaPvH (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Fri, 31 Mar 2017 11:51:07 -0400
Received: from mga07.intel.com ([134.134.136.100]:36229 "EHLO mga07.intel.com"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S933152AbdCaPvG (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Fri, 31 Mar 2017 11:51:06 -0400
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.36,252,1486454400"; 
   d="scan'208";a="82768339"
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 08:53:05 -0700
From: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
        Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>, Shaohua Li <shli@fb.com>,
        lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/intel_rdt: Add cpus_list rdtgroup file
Message-ID: <20170331155305.GD24537@linux.intel.com>
References: <20170329150948.4981-1-jolsa@kernel.org>
 <20170329160825.GA24537@linux.intel.com>
 <alpine.DEB.2.20.1703311046030.1780@nanos>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1703311046030.1780@nanos>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 10:47:52AM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Mar 2017, Fenghua Yu wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 05:09:48PM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > > While playing with the resctrl interface I found it much
> > > easier to deal with cpumask list rather than just regular
> > > cpumask.
> > 
> > Could you please explain specifically why and when it's easier
> > to deal with cpumask list? In programming cases, cpumask
> > and cpumask list are almost same. And people are working
> > on higher level tools to control resctrl. The tools can
> > hide detailed regular cpumask or cpumask list and user
> > doesn't need to care lower level format of cpumask. So
> > is it really useful to add cpus_list?
> 
> Yes, because a lot of people including me do not care about these tools at
> all. Making it easy to read and write from the command line is the first
> thing to do.

Sure, you are right. Hopefully adding a bit more explanation in
the commit message will be helpful.

Thanks.

-Fenghua