Hi Babu,
On 5/6/2024 12:09 PM, Moger, Babu wrote:
> On 5/3/24 18:26, Reinette Chatre wrote:
>> On 3/28/2024 6:06 PM, Babu Moger wrote:
...
>>> + * @mbm_assign_cntrs: Maximum number of assignable counters
>>> */
>>> struct rdt_resource {
>>> int rid;
>>> @@ -188,6 +198,8 @@ struct rdt_resource {
>>> struct list_head evt_list;
>>> unsigned long fflags;
>>> bool cdp_capable;
>>> + bool mbm_assign_capable;
>>> + u32 mbm_assign_cntrs;
>>> };
>>
>> Please check tabs vs spaces (in this whole series please).
>
> Sure. Will do.
>
>>
>> I'm thinking that a new "MBM specific" struct within
>> struct rdt_resource will be helpful to clearly separate the MBM related
>> data. This will be similar to struct resctrl_cache for
>> cache allocation and struct resctrl_membw for memory bandwidth
>> allocation.
>
> Did you mean to move all the fields for monitoring to move to new struct?
>
> Struct resctrl_mbm {
> int num_rmid;
> bool mbm_assign_capable;
> u32 mbm_assign_cntrs;
> }:
>
Indeed, so not actually MBM specific but monitoring specific as you state (with
appropriate naming?). This is purely to help organize data within struct rdt_resource
and (similar to struct resctrl_cache and struct resctrl_membw) not a new
structure expected to be passed around. I think evt_list can also be a member.
Reinette
