From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from foss.arm.com (foss.arm.com [217.140.110.172]) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 896BD41DED9; Mon, 6 Jul 2026 15:49:21 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1783352963; cv=none; b=h6wUJIBK2zFU2RHAcwrp4JKnk8upDX+yoQsgjkSGb8tsXBMWcwGwHIspi3cKUo2nHfGDShbEhj8sYOcGxVz8IRQ1yez+z/XuiwcG344hquujmCD8G90IxXY24pYjYiSKPP04y39LJO4R9Wy38bFOZyd+wkEwNBnLsjaYP947/b8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1783352963; c=relaxed/simple; bh=4pV7GGRE4+B12sGcbtHLfldXfMh6UfXhgLyVeuaZ+hs=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=SfLcGUCf+IUclRrnCq4PQ8cqkLoQ+S8F0I+cdoEZ40MPFWCS65Z290kMoN26amhUJ2Qtt7p87N7f6EYIqQg6n4miZvwJXOXmrVSKxHB3xxd47S39gIrjCXXfc+no1LLFqA39j4X53D8yBC29Vty2qOyGwWzsHSevwODzYOjWbvs= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=arm.com header.i=@arm.com header.b=MOHAloyd; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.140.110.172 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=arm.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=arm.com header.i=@arm.com header.b="MOHAloyd" Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BCC51BCA; Mon, 6 Jul 2026 08:49:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.2.212.8] (e134344.arm.com [10.2.212.8]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9C5AA3F7B4; Mon, 6 Jul 2026 08:49:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=arm.com; s=foss; t=1783352960; bh=4pV7GGRE4+B12sGcbtHLfldXfMh6UfXhgLyVeuaZ+hs=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=MOHAloydZ3OtDpev36IzbSM1TojqUQx0V2RZw12oHqukAvb7FfkRzJ2CdCcJP4sQC Ue3FBf008FZCN2yv/arqAjGKDGK9EQlC8x10GO7LFNumliK9tQTKmljfS3XSQLcQx9 iLeq33o4FCGFfCf+ghHJ/xGST9lNKzR0BNfWVsi8= Message-ID: <49436a6b-ab0c-4c57-8eb7-a332cd6c6f6e@arm.com> Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2026 16:49:17 +0100 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Thunderbird Daily Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/3] x86,fs/resctrl,arm_mpam: Factor MBA parse-time conversion to be per-arch To: Reinette Chatre Cc: james.morse@arm.com, fenghuay@nvidia.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, bp@alien8.de, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, hpa@zytor.com, corbet@lwn.net, x86@kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, dave.martin@arm.com References: <20260515140612.1205251-1-ben.horgan@arm.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Ben Horgan In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Reinette, On 6/5/26 19:41, Reinette Chatre wrote: > Hi Ben, > > On 5/15/26 7:06 AM, Ben Horgan wrote: >> This is a new version of Dave Martin's patch [1] to delegate rounding of >> bandwidth control user values to the arch code. As there is now more than one >> architecture using resctrl, I split the original patch into two, a core resctrl >> patch and an x86 patch, and added an MPAM patch. Please let me know if the patch >> break down and ordering is sensible and whether the pattern should be followed >> for any future similar changes. > > This ordering is sensible to me. I find the patch breakdown a bit fragmented since > the logical resctrl fs change is split yet I also find that you did what was best > to ensure bisectability. I find small changes that are local to subsystems easier to > consider and believe it would be ideal to only have patches touching multiple > subsystems when it cannot be avoided, for example when doing otherwise would break > bisect. Even so, we may learn of better ways to do this when this series is considered > for x86 inclusion. Thanks for giving me your view on this, the review and the R-b's. I find all your proposed changes reasonable and have included them (and only those changes) in a v4 which I will post shortly. Thanks, Ben > > Reinette >