Re: [PATCH v7 00/49] x86/resctrl: Move the resctrl filesystem code to /fs/resctrl

[Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>]

On 3/4/25 1:47 PM, Luck, Tony wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 28, 2025 at 07:58:24PM +0000, James Morse wrote:
>> Changes since v6?:
>>  * All the excitement is in patch 37, turns out there are two rmdir() paths
>>    that don't join up.
>> The last eight patches are new:
>>  * The python script has been replaced with the patch that it generates, see
>>    the bare branch below if you want to regenerate it.
>>  * There have been comments on the followup to the generated patch, those are
>>    included here - I suggest they be squashed into the generated patch.
>>  * This version includes some checkpatch linting from Dave.
>>
>> ---
>> This series renames functions and moves code around. With the
>> exception of invalid configurations for the configurable-events, there should
>> be no changes in behaviour caused by this series. It is now possible for
>> throttle_mode to report 'undefined', but no known platform will do this.
>>
>> The driving pattern is to make things like struct rdtgroup private to resctrl.
>> Features like pseudo-lock aren't going to work on arm64, the ability to disable
>> it at compile time is added.
>>
>> After this, I can start posting the MPAM driver to make use of resctrl on arm64.
>> (What's MPAM? See the cover letter of the first series. [1])
>>
>> This series is based on v6.14-rc3 and can be retrieved from:
>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/morse/linux.git mpam/move_to_fs/v7
>> or for those who want to regnerate the patch that moves all the code:
>> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/morse/linux.git mpam/move_to_fs/v7_bare
>>
>>
>> As ever - bugs welcome,
>> Thanks,
>>
>> James
> 
> Upstream is at -rc5, so it's time to pick what to ask Boris to
> apply to tip for the upcoming v6.15 merge window.
> 
> There are several open issues for Babu's ABMC series. So it
> isn't ready at this time.
> 
> Also several against this MPAM series from James ... but IMHO the
> first bunch of patches look to be in good shape with a
> full set of Reviewed-by and Tested-by tags on parts 1-7,9-11,13-17
> (things get murkier in the 20's and maybe more likely to have
> issues due to skipping patches that don't have all their tags).
> 
> So I applied those patches on top of v6.14-rc5 (all but one applied
> automatically, patch 10 had two line "fuzz" due to skipping patch 8).
> 
> Resulting kernel builds (with W=1), boots, and passes the tests
> in tools/tests/selftests/resctrl.
> 
> In the interests of making forward progress, should we ask Boris
> to take this subset of the MPAM series?
> 

Sounds like there may have only been about a five minute window for
clarifying questions about v6 before the door was shut on it.
Since I missed that window by a couple of hours I'll move to 
v7 where the MPAM pressure has so promptly shifted.

I'd be happy to work with Boris and other x86 maintainers on
any mechanism they prefer.

Reinette