On Mon, Dec 09, 2024 at 03:40:12PM -0800, Reinette Chatre wrote: > Hi Tony, > > On 12/9/24 2:35 PM, Luck, Tony wrote: > >>> mba_mbps_default_event isn't architecture specific. The mba_MBps > >>> feedback code could be implemented on any architecture that supports > >>> both measurement and control of memory bandwidth. > >> > >> Yes, and it should be moved to that header then, right? > >> > >> But not earlier. > > > > If you feel strongly about it then go ahead and cut the line from <linux/rectrl.h> > > and paste it into <asm/resctrl.h> > > I am not sure about this ... I expect the code needing this initially will > form part of the filesystem code so it may be more intuitive to have it > be located in arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/internal.h as Boris suggested. > As part of the arch/fs split it may then move to fs/resctrl/internal.h > > mba_mbps_default_event may even stay internal to the fs/resctrl code with an > arch helper created later to initialize it. This is because I think > the initialization of mba_mbps_default_event may move out of > get_rdt_mon_resources() into resctrl_mon_resource_init() that is being > created as part of the MPAM work [1]. An example of current fs initialization > done in arch code that is moved to it can be found in [2]. Reinette is right. The post-split home of this is not <linux/resctrl.h> but fs/resctrl/internal.h which doesn't exist yet. So Boris is right, this declaration should be added to arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/internal.h by this patch to be moved later. > > [1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241004180347.19985-17-james.morse@xxxxxxx/ > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20241004180347.19985-20-james.morse@xxxxxxx/ -Tony
