On Thu, Apr 25, 2024 at 06:11:13PM +0000, Shiju Jose wrote:
> It is expected to have multiple RAS-specific functionalities other
> than scrubbing in long run. Most of the classes in the kernel found
> as /sys/class/<class-name>/<class-name>X/
>
> If not, however /sys/class/ras/<module -name>X/<feature> is more
> suitable because there are multiple device instances such as cxl
> devices with scrub control feature. For example,
> /sys/class/ras/cxlX/scrub
Make it as user-friendly as possible. cxlX is not as user-friendly as
/sys/class/ras/cxl/<mem_accelerator>
/<fancy_bla_thing>
and so on.
Yes, you can introduce a special category .../ras/cxl/ if there are
multiple cxl devices which have RAS functionality on them.
> Presently underlying hw driver does the check. I think this will
> become more complex if does in the common rate_store() if we have to
> check against either a list of possible rates or min and max rates.
Ok.
> >> +DEVICE_ATTR_RW(enable_background);
> >> +DEVICE_ATTR_RO(name);
> >> +DEVICE_ATTR_RW(rate);
> >> +DEVICE_ATTR_RO(rate_available);
> >
> >static
Forgot one.
> This is the ras instance id (X) used for scrub control feature, /sys/class/ras/rasX/scrub/
Yeah, as discussed above.
> >> +static int __init memory_scrub_control_init(void) {
> >> + return class_register(&scrub_class); }
> >> +subsys_initcall(memory_scrub_control_init);
> >
> >You can't just blindly register this thing without checking whether there are even
> >any hw scrubber devices on the system.
>
> I think it happens only when a dependent module as autoloaded based
> on a scrub device existing with exception of memory scrub control
> built in and who would build this in?
You think or you know?
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
