From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from desiato.infradead.org (desiato.infradead.org [90.155.92.199]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C94D02F7AB1 for ; Thu, 16 Oct 2025 07:43:22 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=90.155.92.199 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1760600604; cv=none; b=VZNeUAJoKnX/zd3MAW/FO7Iu8vHDQ6gc+ePAHLX/ZqcSt9hX0a0jAJmnk5qGw0dRd5xIi1Dglnf2pwYv/HVzbZmnJ7DW3CWpvJCWc5K7WRst5NJs4d4jFqUETUNzW301YlCRHpMmFElicHCsWm8GuerZXHXDFJpuTSW//UiCDQQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1760600604; c=relaxed/simple; bh=OCk8VPrYtr77eXtccQA5LH7YKsdD7s+kAIS1pmRdYMw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Jqv++qPszXqlNPkq0gjhQXnOUtuGZx/YKdQs0GEwnn3rNXyqsP492llyGAfm+7Ghx0u8IC9KEaw09/sPgGxwD9L909YCl0Edmj8ZfIXEzPUeG2SltKMOe86/e2abg4tlxjm+ZrUMywJWYKK5ktZ8NbSJHzOPdF43pZCYGmNPIQk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=infradead.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b=YEkmPmbs; arc=none smtp.client-ip=90.155.92.199 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=infradead.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=infradead.org header.i=@infradead.org header.b="YEkmPmbs" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=desiato.20200630; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version: References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Sender:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=OCk8VPrYtr77eXtccQA5LH7YKsdD7s+kAIS1pmRdYMw=; b=YEkmPmbsiuQz452QQ7cwxWlEB+ o3L9PjX6L9pdedM37qodutDcjz72jITwS9y7YVx4BaCulYFtZowmTReYfXLcN5FNxHGRJrLtpFn31 cRlIDQuT5fZNM941Iyr3Rr6+B260LxtPei4/AdACRZAJXZpY4Nd/gzp2AviEOxLdY02uWmhZhtekk vtu2xdiZJXMWdw/nMOqpNNbXhgRf7IJ9HwYg2ZnD3K5ozYKdiJ4cRHiC21xLf89QbvwuqDxfGKUbz PIP3Wpp73Sbj5zMK7jhroSA5Ho4z70oWb3zhe+TSeY0M5JfcWcLLKfXGyTPvv83WG1TM1OMyzJAnz X/uBO7kg==; Received: from 77-249-17-252.cable.dynamic.v4.ziggo.nl ([77.249.17.252] helo=noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net) by desiato.infradead.org with esmtpsa (Exim 4.98.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1v9Id2-00000006Zbm-1kJ1; Thu, 16 Oct 2025 07:42:35 +0000 Received: by noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net (Postfix, from userid 1000) id F3A1F3001D4; Thu, 16 Oct 2025 09:42:27 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2025 09:42:27 +0200 From: Peter Zijlstra To: "Chen, Yu C" Cc: Shrikanth Hegde , Ingo Molnar , K Prateek Nayak , "Gautham R . Shenoy" , Vincent Guittot , Juri Lelli , Dietmar Eggemann , Steven Rostedt , Ben Segall , Mel Gorman , Valentin Schneider , Madadi Vineeth Reddy , Hillf Danton , Jianyong Wu , Yangyu Chen , Tingyin Duan , Vern Hao , Len Brown , Aubrey Li , Zhao Liu , Chen Yu , Adam Li , Tim Chen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Tim Chen Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/19] sched/fair: Introduce a static key to enable cache aware only for multi LLCs Message-ID: <20251016074227.GY3289052@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <20251015110450.GO3289052@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> <15b871f2-49b8-4b62-926d-31f93ad49f51@intel.com> <6007f50a-7abd-46c8-8934-f1b09df57479@linux.ibm.com> <3d7b6b2c-7b48-4bd5-87bf-39f4c72fa741@intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3d7b6b2c-7b48-4bd5-87bf-39f4c72fa741@intel.com> On Thu, Oct 16, 2025 at 01:01:05AM +0800, Chen, Yu C wrote: > Oh, do you mean only using sched_cache_allowed in sched_cache_enabled()? > I misunderstood that Peter suggested introducing only one key. But I didn't > quite catch up - do you mean we should monitor the switch of FEAT, modify > sched_cache_allowed when needed, and that the OS only queries > sched_cache_allowed > at runtime? Just don't use sched_feat(), add a debugfs file like numa_balancing and then combine the userspace and topology information when setting the one static_branch.