Hi Babu, On 9/1/2023 10:28 AM, Moger, Babu wrote: > On 8/31/23 19:43, Reinette Chatre wrote: >> On 8/31/2023 4:58 PM, Moger, Babu wrote: >>> @@ -3336,6 +3340,9 @@ static int mkdir_rdt_prepare(struct kernfs_node >>> *parent_kn, >>> else >>> files = RFTYPE_BASE | RFTYPE_MON; >>> >>> + if (rdt_mon_capable) >>> + files |= RFTYPE_MON; >>> + >> >> Is this not redundant considering what just happened a few lines above? > > Yea. Right. I will change the previous line to > > files = RFTYPE_BASE; > This is not clear to me. If I understand correctly this means that when rtype == RDTMON_GROUP then files = RFTYPE_BASE? This does not sound right to me. I think it would be awkward to to set files = RFTYPE_BASE if rtype == RDTMON_GROUP and then later do another test using rdt_mon_capable to set the correct flag. It should be possible to integrate this better. What is needed is: When group is a control group: files = RFTYPE_BASE | RFTYPE_CTRL; When group is a monitor group: files = RFTYPE_BASE | RFTYPE_MON; When group is a monitor and control group then: files = RFTYPE_BASE | RFTYPE_CTRL | RFTYPE_MON; How about just moving the "if (rdt_mon_capable)" check into the snippet that sets the flag for a control group? Reinette
