>-----Original Message-----
>From: Borislav Petkov <bp@xxxxxxxxx>
>Sent: 06 May 2024 11:30
>To: Shiju Jose <shiju.jose@xxxxxxxxxx>
>Cc: linux-cxl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-acpi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-
>mm@xxxxxxxxx; dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx; dave@xxxxxxxxxxxx; Jonathan
>Cameron <jonathan.cameron@xxxxxxxxxx>; dave.jiang@xxxxxxxxx;
>alison.schofield@xxxxxxxxx; vishal.l.verma@xxxxxxxxx; ira.weiny@xxxxxxxxx;
>linux-edac@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; david@xxxxxxxxxx;
>Vilas.Sridharan@xxxxxxx; leo.duran@xxxxxxx; Yazen.Ghannam@xxxxxxx;
>rientjes@xxxxxxxxxx; jiaqiyan@xxxxxxxxxx; tony.luck@xxxxxxxxx;
>Jon.Grimm@xxxxxxx; dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; rafael@xxxxxxxxxx;
>lenb@xxxxxxxxxx; naoya.horiguchi@xxxxxxx; james.morse@xxxxxxx;
>jthoughton@xxxxxxxxxx; somasundaram.a@xxxxxxx;
>erdemaktas@xxxxxxxxxx; pgonda@xxxxxxxxxx; duenwen@xxxxxxxxxx;
>mike.malvestuto@xxxxxxxxx; gthelen@xxxxxxxxxx;
>wschwartz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; dferguson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
>wbs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; nifan.cxl@xxxxxxxxx; tanxiaofei
><tanxiaofei@xxxxxxxxxx>; Zengtao (B) <prime.zeng@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
>kangkang.shen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; wanghuiqiang <wanghuiqiang@xxxxxxxxxx>;
>Linuxarm <linuxarm@xxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v8 01/10] ras: scrub: Add scrub subsystem
>
>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.
Sure.
>
>> 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.
Will correct.
>
>> This is the ras instance id (X) used for scrub control feature,
>> /sys/class/ras/rasX/scrub/
>
>Yeah, as discussed above.
OK.
>
>> >> +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?
We know as I had tested.
>
>--
>Regards/Gruss,
> Boris.
>
>https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
Thanks,
Shiju
