Hi Tony,
On 11/8/2023 11:19 AM, Tony Luck wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 06, 2023 at 04:32:56PM -0800, Reinette Chatre wrote:
>> Hi Tony,
>>
>> On 10/31/2023 2:17 PM, Tony Luck wrote:
>>> The same rdt_domain structure is used for both control and monitor
>>> functions. But this results in wasted memory as some of the fields are
>>> only used by control functions, while most are only used for monitor
>>> functions.
>>>
>>> Split into separate rdt_ctrl_domain and rdt_mon_domain structures with
>>> just the fields required for control and monitoring respectively.
>>>
>>> Similar split of the rdt_hw_domain structure into rdt_hw_ctrl_domain
>>> and rdt_hw_mon_domain.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Tony Luck <tony.luck@xxxxxxxxx>
>>> ---
>>> Changes since v9
>>> Comment against patch 4, but now fixed in patch #2. cpu_mask
>>> is included in common header.
This is the expected change I referred to. Specifically:
"cpu_mask is included in common header"
> What am I missing? (Apart from a silly cut & paste error in the comments
> that I just noticed and will fix now).
struct rdt_ctrl_domain {
struct rdt_domain_hdr hdr;
struct cpumask cpu_mask;
...
}
Considering the description of the changes to expect in this version I
did not expect to see a cpu_mask member in struct rdt_ctrl_domain since
it has now been moved to struct rdt_domain_hdr. What am I missing?
Reinette
