Hi Reinette, On 5/8/24 15:41, Reinette Chatre wrote: > Hi Babu, > > On 5/8/2024 1:07 PM, Moger, Babu wrote: >> Hi Reinette, >> >> On 5/7/24 15:26, Reinette Chatre wrote: >>> Hi Babu, >>> >>> On 5/6/2024 10:18 AM, Moger, Babu wrote: >>>> On 5/3/24 18:24, Reinette Chatre wrote: >>>>> On 3/28/2024 6:06 PM, Babu Moger wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> a. Check if ABMC support is available >>>>>> #mount -t resctrl resctrl /sys/fs/resctrl/ >>>>>> >>>>>> #cat /sys/fs/resctrl/info/L3_MON/mbm_assign >>>>>> [abmc] >>>>>> legacy_mbm >>>>>> >>>>>> Linux kernel detected ABMC feature and it is enabled. >>>>> >>>>> Please note that this adds the "abmc" feature to the resctrl >>>>> *filesystem* that supports more architectures than just AMD. Calling the >>>>> resctrl filesystem feature "abmc" means that (a) AMD needs to be ok with >>>>> other architectures calling their features that are >>>>> similar-but-maybe-not-identical-to-AMD-ABMC "abmc", or (b) this needs >>>>> a new generic name. >>>> >>>> It should not a problem if other architecture calling abmc for similar >>>> feature. But generic name is always better if there is a suggestion. >>> >>> "should not a problem" does not instill confidence that AMD is >>> actually ok with this. >> >> The feature "ABMC" has been used in the public document already to refer >> this feature. >> https://www.amd.com/content/dam/amd/en/documents/processor-tech-docs/programmer-references/24594.pdf > > It is clear to me that Assignable Bandwidth Monitoring Counters (ABMC) is the > name of the AMD feature. The question is whether users can use the > same name to interact with "similar but maybe not identical" features from other > architectures, which is what this series enables. > >> If there comes a conflict then we can change it to amd_abmc. Didn't see >> any conflict at this pint. > > How do you envision this? The resctrl filesystem interface is intended to be > architecture neutral so it is not obvious to me how "amd_abmc" is expected > to look? Why would it be necessary to have different architecture specific names > for a similar feature from different architectures that users interact with in > the same way? Sounds to me as though this just needs a new non-AMD marketing name. I think I misunderstood it. It is not a concern to have a same name("abmc") for similar feature across the architectures. ABMC is also kind of generic. I am open to other generic suggestions. I think we should have "assign" and "monitor" words in them. -- Thanks Babu Moger
