Hi Babu, On 9/27/24 6:26 AM, Moger, Babu wrote: > Hi Reinette, > > On 9/26/2024 8:51 PM, Reinette Chatre wrote: >> Hi Babu, >> >> On 9/26/24 12:39 PM, Moger, Babu wrote: >>> On 9/19/24 12:38, Reinette Chatre wrote: >>>> On 9/4/24 3:21 PM, Babu Moger wrote: >> >>>>> + :: >>>>> + >>>>> + # echo "default" > /sys/fs/resctrl/info/L3_MON/mbm_assign_mode >>>>> + >>>>> + The MBM event counters will reset when mbm_assign_mode is changed. Moving to >>>> >>>> "will reset" -> "may reset"? Please also be clear on what is meant with "MBM event counter". >>> >>> It "will reset". >>> >> >> I understand that this is true for the ABMC implementation. My goal with making this vague is >> to not have this reset set in stone if some other implementation behaves differently. > > ok. >> >>>> Note that "counter" has a very specific meaning in this work and after considering that >>>> it is not clear if "MBM event counter will reset" means that the counters are no longer >>>> assigned or if it means that the counts associated with events will be reset. >>> >>> How about >>> >>> "The MBM event counters(mbm_total_bytes and mbm_local_bytes) associated >>> with the event will reset when mbm_assign_mode is changed." >> >> In the docs "mbm_total_bytes" and "mbm_local_bytes" are termed "events" ... maybe >> "The MBM events (mbm_total_bytes and/or mbm_local_bytes) associated >> counters may reset when mbm_assign_mode is changed."? > > Sure. > Please do not just copy the text because I made a mistake with the grammar. "The MBM events (mbm_total_bytes and/or mbm_local_bytes) associated with counters may reset when mbm_assign_mode is changed."? Reinette
