From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Chao Peng <chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 06/13] x86: dynamically get/set CBM for a
 domain
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2015 15:19:35 +0800
Message-ID: <20150623071935.GB6447@pengc-linux.bj.intel.com>
References: <1433307190-6381-1-git-send-email-chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com>
	<1433307190-6381-7-git-send-email-chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com>
	<557FE79202000078000853C4@mail.emea.novell.com>
Reply-To: Chao Peng <chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <557FE79202000078000853C4@mail.emea.novell.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xen.org>
List-Help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.xen.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>,
	<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xen.org?subject=subscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xen.org
To: Jan Beulich <JBeulich@suse.com>
Cc: wei.liu2@citrix.com, Ian.Campbell@citrix.com, stefano.stabellini@eu.citrix.com, andrew.cooper3@citrix.com, dario.faggioli@citrix.com, Ian.Jackson@eu.citrix.com, xen-devel@lists.xen.org, will.auld@intel.com, keir@xen.org, dgdegra@tycho.nsa.gov
List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org

On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 08:08:34AM +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> >>> On 03.06.15 at 06:53, <chao.p.peng@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > +int psr_set_l3_cbm(struct domain *d, unsigned int socket, uint64_t cbm)
> > +{
> > +    unsigned int old_cos, cos;
> > +    struct psr_cat_cbm *map, *found = NULL;
> > +    struct psr_cat_socket_info *info = NULL;
> > +    int ret = get_cat_socket_info(socket, &info);
> > +
> > +    if ( ret )
> > +        return ret;
> > +
> > +    if ( !psr_check_cbm(info->cbm_len, cbm) )
> > +        return -EINVAL;
> > +
> > +    old_cos = d->arch.psr_cos_ids[socket];
> > +    map = info->cos_to_cbm;
> > +
> > +    spin_lock(&info->cbm_lock);
> > +
> > +    for ( cos = 0; cos <= info->cos_max; cos++ )
> > +    {
> > +        /* If still not found, then keep unused one. */
> > +        if ( !found && cos != 0 && map[cos].ref == 0 )
> > +            found = map + cos;
> > +        else if ( map[cos].cbm == cbm )
> > +        {
> > +            if ( unlikely(cos == old_cos) )
> > +            {
> > +                spin_unlock(&info->cbm_lock);
> > +                return 0;
> 
> Is this in particular, but also the surrounding "else if", correct when
> map[cos].ref == 0? 

I can't see any problem now.

> I can't seem to see map[cos].cbm getting
> invalidated when an entry's refcount drops to zero...

map[cos].cbm is not invalidated when refcount == 0 so that when a same
cbm is requested again I don't need to write the corresponding register.

Chao