> I do not think that resctrl's current support of the mbm_total_bytes and > mbm_local_bytes should be considered as the "only" two available "slots" > into which all possible events should be forced into. "mon_features" exists > to guide user space to which events are supported and as I see it new events > can be listed here to inform user space of their availability, with their > associated event files available in the resource groups. 100% I have a number of "events" in the pipeline that do not fit these names. I'm planning on new files with descriptive[1] names for the events they report. -Tony [1] When these are ready to post we can discuss the names I chose and change them if there are better names that work across architectures.
