Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Thu, 9 Jan 2020 14:24:44 +0000
From:   Chris Down <chris@chrisdown.name>
To:     Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>
Cc:     x86@kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@gmail.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>,
        Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
        Michal Hocko <mhocko@suse.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-api@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RESEND v5] x86/resctrl: Add task resctrl information
 display
Message-ID: <20200109142444.GB61542@chrisdown.name>
References: <20200109135001.10076-1-yu.c.chen@intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20200109135001.10076-1-yu.c.chen@intel.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

Chen Yu writes:
>+#ifdef CONFIG_PROC_CPU_RESCTRL
>+
>+/*
>+ * A task can only be part of one control
>+ * group and of one monitoring group which
>+ * is associated to that control group.
>+ * So one line is simple and clear enough:

Can we please avoid using the word "control group" to describe these? It's 
extremely confusing for readers since it's exactly the same word as used for 
actual cgroups, especially since those are also a form of "resource control"...

Doesn't official documentation refer to them as "resource groups" to avoid 
this?