Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.36 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.36;
Date:   Fri, 29 Sep 2023 14:06:19 -0700
From:   Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>
To:     Peter Newman <peternewman@google.com>
Cc:     Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
        Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>, x86@kernel.org,
        Shaopeng Tan <tan.shaopeng@fujitsu.com>,
        James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
        Jamie Iles <quic_jiles@quicinc.com>,
        Babu Moger <babu.moger@amd.com>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
        patches@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 0/8] Add support for Sub-NUMA cluster (SNC) systems
Message-ID: <ZRc8SzTgLd1dACHy@agluck-desk3>
References: <20230829234426.64421-1-tony.luck@intel.com>
 <20230928191350.205703-1-tony.luck@intel.com>
 <CALPaoCjxW70h=rTNNiShEc8bmgwEaHpFnAHRB-m=ch47WdQsig@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <CALPaoCjxW70h=rTNNiShEc8bmgwEaHpFnAHRB-m=ch47WdQsig@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Sep 29, 2023 at 04:33:17PM +0200, Peter Newman wrote:
> Hi Tony,
> 
> On Thu, Sep 28, 2023 at 9:14 PM Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com> wrote:
> >
> > The Sub-NUMA cluster feature on some Intel processors partitions
> > the CPUs that share an L3 cache into two or more sets. This plays
> > havoc with the Resource Director Technology (RDT) monitoring features.
> > Prior to this patch Intel has advised that SNC and RDT are incompatible.
> >
> > Some of these CPU support an MSR that can partition the RMID
> > counters in the same way. This allows for monitoring features
> > to be used (with the caveat that memory accesses between different
> > SNC NUMA nodes may still not be counted accuratlely.
> 
> Is an "SNC NUMA node" a "sub-NUMA node", or a NUMA node on which SNC
> has been enabled?

It would be architecturally possible to enable SNC mode on
a subset of CPU sockets. But there isn't a BIOS setup option
to do that. You either have SNC everywhere, or nowhere.

I prefer "SNC NUMA node" == "sub-NUMA node".

This version "NUMA node on which SNC has been enabled"
makes it sound like there is a control on a NUMA node
that can be switched.  The control is on the CPU socket.
That's often equivalent to a NUMA node, but Intel has
had CPUs in the past where this isn't the case (e.g.
Cascade Lake -AP and Cooper Lake).
> 
> Thanks!
> -Peter


Thanks for the review of the series. I've applied changes
to my local tree. Will post v7 of the series early next
week if no other reviews come in.

-Tony