From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751851AbdARJHS (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Jan 2017 04:07:18 -0500 Received: from Galois.linutronix.de ([146.0.238.70]:47819 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751157AbdARJHL (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Jan 2017 04:07:11 -0500 Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2017 10:05:15 +0100 (CET) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Shivappa Vikas cc: Vikas Shivappa , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com, mingo@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, ravi.v.shankar@intel.com, tony.luck@intel.com, fenghua.yu@intel.com, h.peter.anvin@intel.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/8] x86/intel_rdt/mba: Improvements to handle more RDT resources like MBA In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <1484076788-25385-1-git-send-email-vikas.shivappa@linux.intel.com> <1484076788-25385-4-git-send-email-vikas.shivappa@linux.intel.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 17 Jan 2017, Shivappa Vikas wrote: > On Mon, 16 Jan 2017, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > > On Tue, 10 Jan 2017, Vikas Shivappa wrote: > > > This patch does some changes to get ready to handle more resources like > > > Memory b/w allocation(MBA). > > > > > > -Update the control registers only when user changes the controls(cbm for > > > Cache resources and Mem b/w for memory). Hence not sending IPIs on all > > > domains when user updates the control vals. > > > -Introduce next_enabled_resource rather than looping through all > > > resources while parsing each schemata line. The order of resources > > > should be anyways the same as the root schemata. > > > -Return error as soon as we detect a resource not entering all domain > > > values in schemata rather than waiting till we parse all resources. > > > > That looks all like reasonable optimizations and I have a hard time to > > understand why this is a prerequisite for the bandwidth support. > > > > And each of these changes is independent so they should be in seperate > > patches. > > Ok will split them. Its not a pre requisite for MBA. Should i send as a > seperate series ? Yes please. That way we can apply preparatory things first and then concentrate on the new MBA functionality. Thanks, tglx