From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 97A5E21CC64; Sat, 24 Jan 2026 18:00:04 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769277604; cv=none; b=ddsFSfglKMhImIiZPDfdW+QtUVS9Lz2vlatQDWRQgsbT7S7jZFuAZa89jueZ6LSWi5sW7eo3/ZCDaYx2XcZ0SxSYVSh4RVxgfb4c7ldNQZUtd2NPl2bKEMw7SZcFjjCe51V9xhwTox4rZDRCpBYIrW32rjn2ZO1pIEGsXbbisPY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769277604; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ZEuUe0fii9zeTFf3nGMbuhhNCbG/kSLNmWTlO1fl/hA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=FIPpSLPgMb0Wc3sbK0RePz0XlidUI+cpf75vCA7dwSfWvDTBMPdrObrqmS3lYz8HUM1VREGa1irzB8OcJdWeTu1p+yFjkjUUAo6fH9oDUTB9E7rdFLTxShgh9RCkHd3XCxklgojF1xxnQAZvqGVAyn1tftcGrDnH8Y0pRxGUMts= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=IrbkHLQw; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="IrbkHLQw" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 73711C116D0; Sat, 24 Jan 2026 18:00:03 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1769277603; bh=ZEuUe0fii9zeTFf3nGMbuhhNCbG/kSLNmWTlO1fl/hA=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=IrbkHLQwKIoPQvs4AEvMoM6AWVrTZwsWeB3m0BN/Ce2DyZ7a18JIdmwRocKhHjZQm TiSZKjvgSuEC8nWS4u9hH72wxYz28OJAvW0a5A49+V+CtQS0/JEKfQeBh7kypa/jrE vD22p33UgtzN0XgrPds2fFxXgPaSYS1sdldFighoTXoCVDLak9spgf7AWImTOHUD7B 7AhZ2Q1dzXUaDX5GFneKkjcNFnZ/fIBm+yH7ZV6XQ0hR4uin6T+CNIkhzWAWOkmajb 7wE9bLwrJx7ij92mgiiTjabPsG7w1LPY868N7PHMEHkWTmzI4aVvSV7/xDuhT1rp2O z7Q9UPBPfsp1g== Date: Sat, 24 Jan 2026 10:00:01 -0800 From: Drew Fustini To: Reinette Chatre Cc: Paul Walmsley , Palmer Dabbelt , Albert Ou , Alexandre Ghiti , Radim =?utf-8?B?S3LEjW3DocWZ?= , Samuel Holland , Adrien Ricciardi , Nicolas Pitre , Kornel =?utf-8?Q?Dul=C4=99ba?= , Atish Patra , Atish Kumar Patra , Vasudevan Srinivasan , Ved Shanbhogue , yunhui cui , Chen Pei , Liu Zhiwei , Weiwei Li , guo.wenjia23@zte.com.cn, liu.qingtao2@zte.com.cn, Conor Dooley , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Rob Herring , Tony Luck , Babu Moger , Peter Newman , Fenghua Yu , James Morse , Ben Horgan , Dave Martin , devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, x86@kernel.org, Conor Dooley Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 00/19] RISC-V: QoS: add CBQRI resctrl interface Message-ID: References: <20260119-ssqosid-cbqri-v1-0-aa2a75153832@kernel.org> <1c9b21e3-f64b-4a0c-9e1b-cc90d981159c@intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1c9b21e3-f64b-4a0c-9e1b-cc90d981159c@intel.com> On Thu, Jan 22, 2026 at 02:31:06PM -0800, Reinette Chatre wrote: > Hi Drew, > > On 1/19/26 8:14 PM, Drew Fustini wrote: > > - No MBM (bandwidth monitoring) > > - MBA schema works ok for the CBQRI-enabled memory controllers, but > > resctrl does not currently have solution for representing MBM for > > bandwidth resources that are not associated with a L3 cache. > > - For the old CBQRI proof-of-concept RFC, two separate domains were > > created for each memory controller: one for MB (allocation) and one > > for MBM (monitoring). > > - The monitoring domains had to pretend that these memory controllers > > were L3 caches which is not the case. I have removed this as it was > > too complicated and not the right solution. > > - Fenghua Yu talked about a similar problem last month at LPC in the > > resctrl BoF during the "MBA/MBM on CPU-less Memory Node" topic: > > https://lpc.events/event/19/contributions/2093/ > > - I hope to work with resctrl developers on finding a solution. > > Specific to this open, could you please consider [1] that proposes a way for > resctrl to handle allocation and monitoring of resources at different scope? Thank you for pointing that out. I think that the different scope for bandwidth monitoring would fit CBQRI well. I will reply in that other thread. -Drew