Re: [PATCH v5 01/29] x86,fs/resctrl: Consolidate monitor event descriptions

["Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>]

On Tue, Jun 03, 2025 at 08:25:56PM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> Hi Tony,
> > +void resctrl_enable_mon_event(enum resctrl_event_id evtid);
> > +
> >  bool resctrl_arch_is_evt_configurable(enum resctrl_event_id evt);
> 
> nit: When code is consistent in name use it is easier to read. 
> Above there is already resctrl_arch_is_evt_configurable() that uses "evt"
> as parameter name so naming the new parameter "evt" instead of "evtid"
> will be much easier on the eye to make clear that this is the "same thing".
> Also later, when resctrl_is_mbm_event() is moved it will be clean to have
> it also use "evt" as parameter name and not end up with three different
> "evtid", "evt",  and "e" for these related functions.

Should I also clean up existing muddled naming?  Upstream has the
following names for parameters and local variables of type enum
resctrl_event_id (counts for number of occurrences of each):

      6 eventid
      2 evt
      1 evt_id
      3 evtid
      2 mba_mbps_default_event
      1 mba_mbps_event

It seems that "eventid" is the most popular of existing uses.

Also seems the most descriptive.

Perhaps "mevt" would be a good standard choice for "struct mon_evt *mevt"?
Upstream uses this three times, but I add some extra using "*evt".

-Tony