Hi Tony,
On 11/9/2023 3:09 PM, Tony Luck wrote:
...
> +static void domain_remove_cpu_ctrl(int cpu, struct rdt_resource *r)
> +{
> + int id = get_domain_id_from_scope(cpu, r->ctrl_scope);
> struct rdt_hw_domain *hw_dom;
> + struct rdt_domain_hdr *hdr;
> struct rdt_domain *d;
>
> if (id < 0)
> return;
>
> - d = rdt_find_domain(r, id, NULL);
> - if (!d) {
> - pr_warn("Couldn't find domain with id=%d for CPU %d\n", id, cpu);
> + hdr = rdt_find_domain(&r->ctrl_domains, id, NULL);
> + if (!hdr) {
> + pr_warn("Couldn't find control scope id=%d for CPU %d\n", id, cpu);
This error message seems strange to me. Shouldn't this just be "Couldn't find
control domain with id=..."? Also, can the resource name be added in error message
to help user dig into cause of error?
> return;
> }
> +
> + if (WARN_ON_ONCE(hdr->type != RESCTRL_CTRL_DOMAIN))
> + return;
> +
> + d = container_of(hdr, struct rdt_domain, hdr);
> hw_dom = resctrl_to_arch_dom(d);
>
> cpumask_clear_cpu(cpu, &d->hdr.cpu_mask);
> if (cpumask_empty(&d->hdr.cpu_mask)) {
> - resctrl_offline_domain(r, d);
> + resctrl_offline_ctrl_domain(r, d);
> list_del(&d->hdr.list);
>
> /*
> @@ -596,6 +654,38 @@ static void domain_remove_cpu(int cpu, struct rdt_resource *r)
>
> return;
> }
> +}
> +
> +static void domain_remove_cpu_mon(int cpu, struct rdt_resource *r)
> +{
> + int id = get_domain_id_from_scope(cpu, r->mon_scope);
> + struct rdt_hw_domain *hw_dom;
> + struct rdt_domain_hdr *hdr;
> + struct rdt_domain *d;
> +
> + if (id < 0)
> + return;
> +
> + hdr = rdt_find_domain(&r->mon_domains, id, NULL);
> + if (!hdr) {
> + pr_warn("Couldn't find monitor scope id=%d for CPU %d\n", id, cpu);
> + return;
> + }
Similar to above, can this be "Couldn't find monitor domain with id..."?
Can resource name be added here also?
The rest of the patch looks good to me.
Reinette
