On 7/3/20 11:51 AM, Michal Privoznik wrote:
On 7/3/20 11:23 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 03:49:06PM +0200, Michal Privoznik wrote:
To cite ACPI specification:
Functionally the XML looks find to me, but I was just thinking it looks
a bit wierd to have <bandwidth> under a <latencies> wrapper. I'm not
entirely sure what better name we should use - perhaps "interconnects" ?
<interconnects>
<latency initiator='0' target='0' type='access' value='5'/>
<latency initiator='0' target='0' cache='1' type='access'
value='10'/>
<bandwidth initiator='0' target='0' type='access'
value='204800' unit='KiB'/>
</interconnects>
any other ideas ?
That sounds better. Or we can admit this is HMAT an have <hmat/> instead
<interconnects/>? But that won't be much future proof so your suggestion
sound better.
Alright, no one suggested anything better and I'd like to push these to
get the most out of the development window possible. I'll change this to
<interconnects/> and push. We can still change it until the release, if
needed.
Michal
