Re: [PATCH v9 09/24] x86/resctrl: Use __set_bit()/__clear_bit() instead of open coding

James Morse
2024-02-20T16:27:23Z

Hi David,

On 20/02/2024 16:00, David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 13.02.24 19:44, James Morse wrote:
>> The resctrl CLOSID allocator uses a single 32bit word to track which
>> CLOSID are free. The setting and clearing of bits is open coded.
>>
>> Convert the existing open coded bit manipulations of closid_free_map
>> to use __set_bit() and friends. These don't need to be atomic as this
>> list is protected by the mutex.

>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/rdtgroup.c
>> b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/rdtgroup.c
>> index dcffd1c4a476..bc6e0f83c847 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/rdtgroup.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/rdtgroup.c
>> @@ -111,7 +111,7 @@ void rdt_staged_configs_clear(void)
>>    * - Our choices on how to configure each resource become progressively more
>>    *   limited as the number of resources grows.
>>    */
>
> That comment talks about "free CLOSIDs in a single integer". Once could think about
> rephrasing that to "free CLOSIDs in a simple bitmap."
>
>> -static int closid_free_map;
>> +static unsigned long closid_free_map;
>>   static int closid_free_map_len;
>>     int closids_supported(void)
>> @@ -130,8 +130,8 @@ static void closid_init(void)
>>         closid_free_map = BIT_MASK(rdt_min_closid) - 1;
>
> Now that we use "unsigned long", I was wondering for a second if we should use "proper"
> bitmap functions here like
>
>     bitmap_fill(closid_free_map, rdt_min_closid);
>
> and converting the alloc path (replace ffs() in closid_alloc()):
>
>     closid = find_first_bit(closid_free_map, closid_free_map_len);
>     if (closid == closid_free_map_len)
>         return -ENOSPC;
>     __clear_bit(closid, &closid_free_map);
>
> (would get rid of the closid-- in closid_alloc())

Yup. I have this as something to post after all the MPAM changes as it's not necessary to
get MPAM going. The patch[0] uses the bitmap APIs you suggest to remove the fixed limit on
the number of CLOSID/PARTID.
MPAM systems are being built with more than 32, but will work without that patch.

> Just a thought, so
>
> Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <david@redhat.com>

Thanks!

James

[0]