Hi Peter, On 7/25/24 12:11, Peter Newman wrote: > Hi Babu, > > On Wed, Jul 24, 2024 at 6:23 PM Moger, Babu <bmoger@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Hi Peter, >> >> On 7/24/2024 7:03 PM, Peter Newman wrote: >>> Hi Babu, >>> >>> On Wed, Jul 3, 2024 at 2:51 PM Babu Moger <babu.moger@xxxxxxx> wrote: >>>> >>>> Introduce the interface to enable events in ABMC mode. >>>> >>>> Events can be enabled or disabled by writing to file >>>> /sys/fs/resctrl/info/L3_MON/mbm_control >>>> >>>> Format is similar to the list format with addition of op-code for the >>>> assignment operation. >>>> "<CTRL_MON group>/<MON group>/<op-code><flags>" >>>> >>>> Format for specific type of groups: >>>> >>>> * Default CTRL_MON group: >>>> "//<domain_id><op-code><flags>" >>>> >>>> * Non-default CTRL_MON group: >>>> "<CTRL_MON group>//<domain_id><op-code><flags>" >>>> >>>> * Child MON group of default CTRL_MON group: >>>> "/<MON group>/<domain_id><op-code><flags>" >>>> >>>> * Child MON group of non-default CTRL_MON group: >>>> "<CTRL_MON group>/<MON group>/<domain_id><op-code><flags>" >>> >>> Just a reminder, Reinette and I had discussed[1] omitting the >>> domain_id for performing the same operation on all domains. >> >> Yes. I remember. Lets refresh our memory. >>> >>> I would really appreciate this, otherwise our most typical operations >>> could be really tedious and needlessly serialized. >> >>> >>> # cat mbm_control >>> //0=tl;1=tl;2=tl;3=tl;4=tl;5=tl;6=tl;7=tl;8=tl;9=tl;10=tl;11=tl;12=tl;13=tl;14=tl;15=tl;16=tl;17=tl;18=tl;19=tl;20=tl;21=tl;22=tl;23=tl;24=tl;25=tl;26=tl;27=tl;28=tl;29=tl;30=tl;31=tl; >>> # echo '//-l' > mbm_control >> >> What is the expectation here? >> You want to unassign local event on all the domains? > > Correct. > >> >> Domain id makes it easy to parse the command. Without that it parsing >> code becomes messy. >> >> How about something like this? We can use the max domain id to mean all >> the domains. In the above case there are 32 domains(0-31). 32 is total >> number of domains. We can get that details looking through all the >> domains. We can print that detail when we list it. > > This sounds like only a minor simplification to the parsing code. It > seems like it would be easy to determine if the final '/' is > immediately followed by an opcode (+-=_) rather than a number. Ok. Will try to get that working. Will let you know if there are complexities with that.-- Thanks Babu Moger
