Hi Babu,
On 1/12/2024 12:38 PM, Moger, Babu wrote:
> Hi Reinette,
>
> On 1/12/2024 1:02 PM, Reinette Chatre wrote:
>> Hi Babu,
>>
>> On 1/11/2024 1:36 PM, Babu Moger wrote:
>>
>>> @@ -1686,6 +1681,13 @@ static int mon_config_write(struct rdt_resource *r, char *tok, u32 evtid)
>>> return -EINVAL;
>>> }
>>> + /* mon_config cannot be more than the supported set of events */
>> copy&paste error? There is no mon_config in this function.
> Yea. it should be mbm_cfg_mask. Will fix it.
I do not think it is correct to replace mon_config with mbm_cfg_mask. Is this comment
not referring to the user provided value (that is checked against mbm_cfg_mask)? So
perhaps something like:
/* Check value from user against supported events. */
or
/* Value from user cannot be more than the supported set of events. */
Please feel free to improve.
>>
>> (copy&paste difficulties reminds me of [1])
>>
>>> + if ((val & hw_res->mbm_cfg_mask) != val) {
>>> + rdt_last_cmd_printf("Invalid event configuration: The maximum valid "
>>> + "bitmask is 0x%02x\n", hw_res->mbm_cfg_mask);
>> checkpatch.pl should have warned about this split of text across two lines.
>> Logging functions and single strings are allowed to exceed the max line length.
>> If you just merge the two lines then checkpatch.pl may still warn for resctrl strings
>> but that is because it does not recognize rdt_last_cmd_printf() as a logging function.
>>
>> You can also just shorten the string so this patch passes the checkpatch.pl check.
>> For example,
>> "Invalid event configuration: maximum valid mask is 0x%02x\n"
>> or
>> "Invalid event configuration: maximum is 0x%02x\n"
>> or ?
>
> Yes. Checkpatch reported error when I split the text.
>
> How about this?. Checkpatch is happy.
>
> rdt_last_cmd_printf("Invalid event configuration: max valid mask is 0x%02x\n",
> + hw_res->mbm_cfg_mask);
>
Looks good.
Reinette
