Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932838AbdDEPmE (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Apr 2017 11:42:04 -0400 Received: from Galois.linutronix.de ([146.0.238.70]:33502 "EHLO Galois.linutronix.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755739AbdDEPkl (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Apr 2017 11:40:41 -0400 Date: Wed, 5 Apr 2017 17:40:35 +0200 (CEST) From: Thomas Gleixner To: Vikas Shivappa cc: vikas.shivappa@intel.com, x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com, mingo@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, ravi.v.shankar@intel.com, tony.luck@intel.com, fenghua.yu@intel.com, h.peter.anvin@intel.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/8] x86/intel_rct/mba: Add MBA structures and initialize MBA In-Reply-To: <1491256652-18729-5-git-send-email-vikas.shivappa@linux.intel.com> Message-ID: References: <1491256652-18729-1-git-send-email-vikas.shivappa@linux.intel.com> <1491256652-18729-5-git-send-email-vikas.shivappa@linux.intel.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2370 Lines: 79 On Mon, 3 Apr 2017, Vikas Shivappa wrote: > > /** > + * struct rdt_domain - group of cpus sharing an RDT resource > + * @list: all instances of this resource > + * @id: unique id for this instance > + * @cpu_mask: which cpus share this resource > + * @ctrl_val: array of cache or mem ctrl values (indexed by CLOSID) > + * @new_cbm: new cbm value to be loaded > + * @have_new_cbm: did user provide new_cbm for this domain The version which you removed below has the kernel-doc comments correct .... > +/** > * struct rdt_resource - attributes of an RDT resource > * @enabled: Is this feature enabled on this machine > * @capable: Is this feature available on this machine > @@ -78,6 +109,16 @@ struct rftype { > * @data_width: Character width of data when displaying > * @min_cbm_bits: Minimum number of consecutive bits to be set > * in a cache bit mask > + * @msr_update: Function pointer to update QOS MSRs > + * @max_delay: Max throttle delay. Delay is the hardware > + * understandable value for memory bandwidth. > + * @min_bw: Minimum memory bandwidth percentage user > + * can request > + * @bw_gran: Granularity at which the memory bandwidth > + * is allocated > + * @delay_linear: True if memory b/w delay is in linear scale > + * @mb_map: Mapping of memory b/w percentage to > + * memory b/w delay values > * @domains: All domains for this resource > * @msr_base: Base MSR address for CBMs > * @cache_level: Which cache level defines scope of this domain > @@ -94,6 +135,14 @@ struct rdt_resource { > int min_cbm_bits; > u32 default_ctrl; > int data_width; > + void (*msr_update) (struct rdt_domain *d, struct msr_param *m, > + struct rdt_resource *r); > + u32 max_delay; > + u32 min_bw; > + u32 bw_gran; > + u32 delay_linear; > + u32 *mb_map; I don't know what other weird controls will be added over time, but we are probably better off to have struct cache_ctrl { int cbm_len; int min_cbm_bits; }; struct mba_ctrl { u32 max_delay; u32 min_bw; u32 bw_gran; u32 delay_linear; u32 *mb_map; }; and in then in struct rdt_resource: union { struct cache_ctrl foo; struct mba_ctrl bla; } ctrl; That avoids that rdt_resource becomes a hodgepodge of unrelated or even contradicting fields. Hmm? Thanks, tglx