Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-104684-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.199.223;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20240312075349.977-1-rex.nie@jaguarmicro.com> <fed6affb-c7f4-4992-8646-8f5a52c33966@intel.com>
 <162f5113-4eb6-dcea-f034-c81b9dc021b6@amd.com>
In-Reply-To: <162f5113-4eb6-dcea-f034-c81b9dc021b6@amd.com>
From: Peter Newman <peternewman@google.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2024 09:56:50 -0700
Message-ID: <CALPaoCjorOe8FVOu6_sMrG_8jAgSNNsw8=KDwOrwtftovGiRXQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: 32bit resctrl? (was Re: [PATCH v2] fs/resctrl: fix domid loss
 precision issue)
To: babu.moger@amd.com
Cc: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>, Rex Nie <rex.nie@jaguarmicro.com>, 
	james.morse@arm.com, "x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>, "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>, 
	Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>, fenghua.yu@intel.com, ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com, 
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Mar 15, 2024 at 9:17=E2=80=AFAM Moger, Babu <bmoger@amd.com> wrote:
>
>
> On 3/14/2024 10:25 AM, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> > +x86 maintainers, Tony, Babu, Peter
> >
> > Hi Everybody,
> >
> > On 3/12/2024 12:53 AM, Rex Nie wrote:
> >> diff --git a/fs/resctrl/internal.h b/fs/resctrl/internal.h
> >> index 7a6f46b4edd0..096317610949 100644
> >> --- a/fs/resctrl/internal.h
> >> +++ b/fs/resctrl/internal.h
> >> @@ -94,7 +94,7 @@ union mon_data_bits {
> >>      struct {
> >>              unsigned int rid                : 10;
> >>              enum resctrl_event_id evtid     : 8;
> >> -            unsigned int domid              : 14;
> >> +            u32                             domid;
> >>      } u;
> >>   };
> >>
> > resctrl currently supports 32bit builds. Fixing this issue* in this way
>
> I have never bothered about 32bit builds.   Is Intel still testing 32bit
> builds?

I can confirm we don't have any 32-bit builds.


> The structure pointer "union mon_data_bits priv;" is created in stack
> and passed to create mondata directory. We are reading it later again in
> rdtgroup_mondata_show.
>
> How is this pointer valid again?  Shouldn't we use static pointer or
> allocate memory for the pointer?

The union is copied by value into the pointer-sized field, hence the
need for pointers to be large enough to hold this value.

-Peter