From: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>
To: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
Cc: "Yu, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
"Wieczor-Retman, Maciej" <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>,
"x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"patches@lists.linux.dev" <patches@lists.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v20 07/18] x86/resctrl: Block use of mba_MBps mount option on Sub-NUMA Cluster (SNC) systems
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 08:24:57 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZnWbSTY64N9_aSWA@agluck-desk3.sc.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <74ed79c1-b024-4b22-9858-14c1e5284a20@intel.com>
On Thu, Jun 20, 2024 at 06:56:56PM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> Hi Tony,
>
> On 6/20/24 3:07 PM, Luck, Tony wrote:
> > > > When SNC is enabled there is a mismatch between the MBA control function
> > > > which operates at L3 cache scope and the MBM monitor functions which
> > > > measure memory bandwidth on each SNC node.
> > > >
> > > > Block use of the mba_MBps when scopes for MBA/MBM do not match.
> > > >
> > > > Signed-off-by: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>
> > > > ---
> > > > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/rdtgroup.c | 4 +++-
> > > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/rdtgroup.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/rdtgroup.c
> > > > index eb3bbfa96d5a..a0a43dbe011b 100644
> > > > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/rdtgroup.c
> > > > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/rdtgroup.c
> > > > @@ -2339,10 +2339,12 @@ static void mba_sc_domain_destroy(struct rdt_resource *r,
> > > > */
> > > > static bool supports_mba_mbps(void)
> > > > {
> > > > + struct rdt_resource *rmbm = &rdt_resources_all[RDT_RESOURCE_L3].r_resctrl;
> > > > struct rdt_resource *r = &rdt_resources_all[RDT_RESOURCE_MBA].r_resctrl;
> > > >
> > > > return (is_mbm_local_enabled() &&
> > > > - r->alloc_capable && is_mba_linear());
> > > > + r->alloc_capable && is_mba_linear() &&
> > > > + r->ctrl_scope == rmbm->mon_scope);
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > /*
> > >
> > > The function comments of supports_mba_mbps() needs an update to accompany
> > > this new requirement.
> >
> > Will add comment on extra requirement.
> >
> > > I also think that the "mba_MBps" mount option is now complicated enough to
> > > warrant a clear error to user space when using it fails. invalfc() is
> > > available for this and enables user space to get detailed log message
> > > from a read() on an fd created by fsopen().
> > >
> > > Perhaps something like (please check line length and feel free to improve
> > > since as is it may quite cryptic):
> > > rdt_parse_param(...)
> > > {
> > >
> > >
> > > ...
> > > case Opt_mba_mbps:
> > > if (!supports_mba_mbps())
> > > return invalfc(fc, "mba_MBps requires both MBM and (linear scale) MBA at L3 scope");
> > > ...
> > > }
> >
> > Line length is indeed a problem (108 characters). Usual line split methods barely help as the moving the
> > string to the next line and aligning with the "(" only saves 4 characters.
> >
> > How about this (suggestions for a shorter variable name - line is 97 characters)
> >
> > static char mba_mbps_invalid[] = "mba_MBps requires both MBM and (linear scale) MBA at L3 scope";
> >
> > rdt_parse_param(...)
> > {
> > ...
> > case Opt_mba_mbps:
> > if (!supports_mba_mbps())
> > return invalfc(fc, mba_mbps_invalid);
> > ...
> > }
>
> On 6/20/24 3:12 PM, Luck, Tony wrote:
> > > static char mba_mbps_invalid[] = "mba_MBps requires both MBM and (linear scale) MBA at L3 scope";
> >
> > checkpatch recommends "static const char ..." pushing this over 100 chars :-(
> >
>
> How about something like below that reaches 96:
>
> case Opt_mba_mbps:
> if (!supports_mba_mbps())
> return invalfc(fc,
> "mba_MBps requires both MBM and linear MBA at L3 scope");
>
Reinette,
Alternative option. Move the messaging into supports_mba_mbps() and
split into shorter pieces for each reason. The other callers of
supports_mba_mbps() that are just re-checking status would pass
a NULL argument.
If this looks reasonable I can do it in two patches. First to add
invalfc() for the existing cases. Second to add the SNC change.
-Tony
---
static bool supports_mba_mbps(struct fs_context *fc)
{
return invalfc(fc, mba_mbps_invalid);
struct rdt_resource *rmbm = &rdt_resources_all[RDT_RESOURCE_L3].r_resctrl;
struct rdt_resource *r = &rdt_resources_all[RDT_RESOURCE_MBA].r_resctrl;
if (!is_mbm_local_enabled()) {
if (fc)
invalfc(fc, "mba_MBps requires local MBM");
return false;
}
if (!r->alloc_capable) {
if (fc)
invalfc(fc, "mba_MBps requires MBA");
return false;
}
if (!is_mba_linear()) {
if (fc)
invalfc(fc, "mba_MBps requires linear MBA");
return false;
}
if (r->ctrl_scope != rmbm->mon_scope) {
if (fc)
invalfc(fc, "mba_MBps requires MBM/MBA at L3 scope");
return false;
}
return true;
}
rdt_parse_param(...)
{
...
case Opt_mba_mbps:
if (!supports_mba_mbps(fc))
return -EINVAL;
...
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-21 15:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 61+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-10 18:35 [PATCH v20 00/18] Add support for Sub-NUMA cluster (SNC) systems Tony Luck
2024-06-10 18:35 ` [PATCH v20 01/18] x86/resctrl: Prepare for new domain scope Tony Luck
2024-06-20 21:12 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-06-10 18:35 ` [PATCH v20 02/18] x86/resctrl: Prepare to split rdt_domain structure Tony Luck
2024-06-20 21:13 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-06-10 18:35 ` [PATCH v20 03/18] x86/resctrl: Prepare for different scope for control/monitor operations Tony Luck
2024-06-20 21:13 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-06-10 18:35 ` [PATCH v20 04/18] x86/resctrl: Split the rdt_domain and rdt_hw_domain structures Tony Luck
2024-06-20 21:14 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-06-10 18:35 ` [PATCH v20 05/18] x86/resctrl: Add node-scope to the options for feature scope Tony Luck
2024-06-20 21:15 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-06-10 18:35 ` [PATCH v20 06/18] x86/resctrl: Introduce snc_nodes_per_l3_cache Tony Luck
2024-06-17 22:36 ` Moger, Babu
2024-06-18 22:58 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-06-19 14:43 ` Moger, Babu
2024-06-20 21:19 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-06-10 18:35 ` [PATCH v20 07/18] x86/resctrl: Block use of mba_MBps mount option on Sub-NUMA Cluster (SNC) systems Tony Luck
2024-06-20 21:21 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-06-20 22:07 ` Luck, Tony
2024-06-20 22:12 ` Luck, Tony
2024-06-21 1:56 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-06-21 15:24 ` Tony Luck [this message]
2024-06-21 17:10 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-06-10 18:35 ` [PATCH v20 08/18] x86/resctrl: Prepare for new Sub-NUMA Cluster (SNC) monitor files Tony Luck
2024-06-20 21:22 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-06-10 18:35 ` [PATCH v20 09/18] x86/resctrl: Add a new field to struct rmid_read for summation of domains Tony Luck
2024-06-20 21:22 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-06-20 22:42 ` Luck, Tony
2024-06-21 1:59 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-06-21 16:07 ` Luck, Tony
2024-06-21 17:10 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-06-10 18:35 ` [PATCH v20 10/18] x86/resctrl: Refactor mkdir_mondata_subdir() with a helper function Tony Luck
2024-06-20 21:23 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-06-10 18:35 ` [PATCH v20 11/18] x86/resctrl: Allocate a new field in union mon_data_bits Tony Luck
2024-06-20 21:28 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-06-10 18:35 ` [PATCH v20 12/18] x86/resctrl: Create Sub-NUMA Cluster (SNC) monitor files Tony Luck
2024-06-20 21:30 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-06-10 18:35 ` [PATCH v20 13/18] x86/resctrl: Handle removing directories in Sub-NUMA Cluster (SNC) mode Tony Luck
2024-06-20 21:30 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-06-10 18:35 ` [PATCH v20 14/18] x86/resctrl: Fill out rmid_read structure for smp_call*() to read a counter Tony Luck
2024-06-20 21:31 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-06-10 18:35 ` [PATCH v20 15/18] x86/resctrl: Make __mon_event_count() handle sum domains Tony Luck
2024-06-20 21:31 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-06-10 18:35 ` [PATCH v20 16/18] x86/resctrl: Enable RMID shared RMID mode on Sub-NUMA Cluster (SNC) systems Tony Luck
2024-06-20 21:32 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-06-10 18:35 ` [PATCH v20 17/18] x86/resctrl: Sub-NUMA Cluster (SNC) detection Tony Luck
2024-06-20 21:34 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-06-21 17:05 ` Markus Elfring
2024-06-21 17:14 ` Luck, Tony
2024-06-10 18:35 ` [PATCH v20 18/18] x86/resctrl: Update documentation with Sub-NUMA cluster changes Tony Luck
2024-06-20 21:35 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-06-13 19:17 ` [PATCH v20 00/18] Add support for Sub-NUMA cluster (SNC) systems Moger, Babu
2024-06-13 20:32 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-06-13 21:02 ` Luck, Tony
2024-06-14 16:27 ` Moger, Babu
2024-06-14 16:46 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-06-14 21:29 ` Moger, Babu
2024-06-14 21:40 ` Luck, Tony
2024-06-14 22:31 ` Moger, Babu
2024-06-14 23:11 ` Reinette Chatre
2024-06-17 14:06 ` Moger, Babu
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=ZnWbSTY64N9_aSWA@agluck-desk3.sc.intel.com \
--to=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=Dave.Martin@arm.com \
--cc=babu.moger@amd.com \
--cc=dfustini@baylibre.com \
--cc=fenghua.yu@intel.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=reinette.chatre@intel.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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