Hi Reinette,
On 8/30/23 17:05, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> Hi Babu,
>
> On 8/30/2023 2:18 PM, Moger, Babu wrote:
>> On 8/30/23 15:00, Reinette Chatre wrote:
>>> On 8/30/2023 12:50 PM, Moger, Babu wrote:
>>>> On 8/29/23 15:11, Reinette Chatre wrote:
>>>>> On 8/21/2023 4:30 PM, Babu Moger wrote:
>>>>>> The default resource group and its files are created during kernel
>>>>>> init time. Upcoming changes will make some resctrl files optional
>>>>>> based on a mount parameter. If optional files are to be added to the
>>>>>> default group based on the mount option, then each new file needs to
>>>>>> be created separately and call kernfs_activate() again.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Create all files of the default resource group during resctrl
>>>>>> mount, destroyed during unmount, to avoid scattering resctrl
>>>>>> file addition across two separate code flows.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Suggested-by: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>> Signed-off-by: Babu Moger <babu.moger@xxxxxxx>
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/internal.h | 2 +
>>>>>> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/rdtgroup.c | 55 +++++++++++++++-----------
>>>>>> 2 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/internal.h b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/internal.h
>>>>>> index b09e7abd1299..44ad98f8c7af 100644
>>>>>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/internal.h
>>>>>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/internal.h
>>>>>> @@ -611,5 +611,7 @@ void rdt_domain_reconfigure_cdp(struct rdt_resource *r);
>>>>>> void __init thread_throttle_mode_init(void);
>>>>>> void __init mbm_config_rftype_init(const char *config);
>>>>>> void rdt_staged_configs_clear(void);
>>>>>> +int rdtgroup_setup_root(struct rdt_fs_context *ctx);
>>>>>> +void rdtgroup_destroy_root(void);
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> From what I can tell these functions are only used in rdtgroup.c.
>>>>> Can this export be avoided by just moving these functions within
>>>>> rdtgroup.c and making them static?
>>>>
>>>> Yes. It is used only in rdtgroup.c. We can make this static by adding the
>>>> prototypes of these function in the beginning of rdtgroup.c file to avoid
>>>> implicit declaration compiler errors.
>>>
>>> Why not just place the functions earlier in rdtgroup.c so that they are
>>> located before all callers?
>>
>> Couple of problems with that.
>> 1. rdtgroup_setup_root needs the the definition of
>> rdtgroup_kf_syscall_ops which is defined later in the file.
>>
>> Static struct kernfs_syscall_ops rdtgroup_kf_syscall_ops = {
>> .mkdir = rdtgroup_mkdir,
>> .rmdir = rdtgroup_rmdir,
>> .rename = rdtgroup_rename,
>> .show_options = rdtgroup_show_options,
>> };
>>
>> 2. rdtgroup_setup_root is called in rdt_get_tree which is defined earlier
>> in the file.
>>
>> So, this needs re-arrange of all these functions. That is reason I made
>> these functions global. Thought it may be too much a change for this purpose.
>
> I see, yes, to accomplish this would trigger a lot of churn and also seem
> to cascade into other dependencies needing to be taken into account.
> As you suggested the static declaration can be added to the top of rdtgroup.c
> as proposal for the next stage.
>
Sure.
Thanks
Babu Moger
