From: Shrikanth Hegde <sshegde@linux.ibm.com>
To: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@linux.ibm.com>
Cc: maddy@linux.ibm.com, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
peterz@infradead.org, tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com,
christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
ritesh.list@gmail.com, kprateek.nayak@amd.com,
yu.c.chen@intel.com, vineethr@linux.ibm.com,
vincent.guittot@linaro.org, npiggin@gmail.com,
mpe@ellerman.id.au
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] powerpc/topology: Introduce llc_override debug knob
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2026 19:40:33 +0530 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <26486e03-b1f0-4a84-b6df-75b747d9f1a1@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aszPQppmUXcJER1x@linux.ibm.com>
Hi Srikar. Thanks for taking a look at the patches.
>> #endif
>> +
>> +enum llc_override_values {
>> + LLC_OVERRIDE_DISABLED,
>> + LLC_OVERRIDE_SMT,
>> + LLC_OVERRIDE_MC,
>> + LLC_OVERRIDE_PKG,
>> +};
>> +
>
> For the current experiments, would it help to keep it simple and have just
> SMT and MC. I mean we can include disabled and pkg based on our experiments.
>
I think we should keep disabled. So it is clear when disabled, there is no adverse
effect of it.
I think keeping pkg for experimentation seems okay. If not necessary we can remove it later.
Having at pkg gives you to try increased number of cores in a llc. So it may be a useful
too IMHO.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-10-12 14:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-10-12 10:20 [PATCH 0/4] powerpc/topology: Introduce llc_override debugfs Shrikanth Hegde
2026-10-12 10:20 ` [PATCH 1/4] powerpc/topology: Introduce llc_override debug knob Shrikanth Hegde
2026-10-12 12:14 ` Srikar Dronamraju
2026-10-12 14:10 ` Shrikanth Hegde [this message]
2026-10-12 10:20 ` [PATCH 2/4] powerpc/topology: Add docs for llc_override Shrikanth Hegde
2026-10-12 10:20 ` [PATCH 3/4] powerpc/topology: Update mc/pkg flags based on llc_override Shrikanth Hegde
2026-10-12 10:20 ` [PATCH 4/4] powerpc/topology: Rebuild sched domains on llc_override change Shrikanth Hegde
2026-10-12 12:19 ` [PATCH 0/4] powerpc/topology: Introduce llc_override debugfs Srikar Dronamraju
2026-10-12 14:14 ` Shrikanth Hegde
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=26486e03-b1f0-4a84-b6df-75b747d9f1a1@linux.ibm.com \
--to=sshegde@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu \
--cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=maddy@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=ritesh.list@gmail.com \
--cc=srikar@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=vincent.guittot@linaro.org \
--cc=vineethr@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=yu.c.chen@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®