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 925185EE7A for ; Mon, 22 Jan 2024 18:06:16 +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=1705946779; cv=none; b=lJBsy19MMXvQcOst5ftBR9tk7jRQZBaYolE8EMGuV1DH26D7xDMGJSkJ6YABTv8IUE3NvKS5tERyX3gkGZJOp0WpK3B8IA4MiNhWndXBkot8QUtd3gw0V4/dsX5ZFX01dDMKWQdmB26MFVXHcMrCfXGh/tsqxIRMsk9Qmwemb4g= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1705946779; c=relaxed/simple; bh=nvsspuUHuwR73EGCDJzUphXpHELKnqbnPKtYpb4y1uc=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=JS3kGzjefL7cKwI6khp3CS7XmJLD6R5hblpBInrxwC2pf4AMsxtfY0h2GxaxcMQlAPtz+r61X8e4X8SemfDfAswoW9pu886THFUz0c4scEFhRtxqkgr4/n8jlFRZlU5/6dseaTj0jDiPnX59h1B7mwaC54MpKEKcprKnYwNVAqg= 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; 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 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 22D9A1424; Mon, 22 Jan 2024 10:07:02 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.1.197.60] (eglon.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.197.60]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9D01A3F5A1; Mon, 22 Jan 2024 10:06:13 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <9d30c56a-a772-c121-ca02-f3f237f0a892@arm.com> Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2024 18:06:12 +0000 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux aarch64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.13.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 10/24] x86/resctrl: Allocate the cleanest CLOSID by searching closid_num_dirty_rmid Content-Language: en-GB To: Reinette Chatre , x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Cc: Fenghua Yu , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Borislav Petkov , H Peter Anvin , Babu Moger , shameerali.kolothum.thodi@huawei.com, D Scott Phillips OS , carl@os.amperecomputing.com, lcherian@marvell.com, bobo.shaobowang@huawei.com, tan.shaopeng@fujitsu.com, baolin.wang@linux.alibaba.com, Jamie Iles , Xin Hao , peternewman@google.com, dfustini@baylibre.com, amitsinght@marvell.com References: <20231215174343.13872-1-james.morse@arm.com> <20231215174343.13872-11-james.morse@arm.com> <25e75e7a-7cda-4099-8331-8fb1050a9dd5@intel.com> From: James Morse In-Reply-To: <25e75e7a-7cda-4099-8331-8fb1050a9dd5@intel.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Reinette, On 16/12/2023 05:01, Reinette Chatre wrote: > On 12/15/2023 9:43 AM, James Morse wrote: >> MPAM's PMG bits extend its PARTID space, meaning the same PMG value can be >> used for different control groups. >> >> This means once a CLOSID is allocated, all its monitoring ids may still be >> dirty, and held in limbo. >> >> Instead of allocating the first free CLOSID, on architectures where >> CONFIG_RESCTRL_RMID_DEPENDS_ON_CLOSID is enabled, search >> closid_num_dirty_rmid[] to find the cleanest CLOSID. >> >> The CLOSID found is returned to closid_alloc() for the free list >> to be updated. > (This is an example of me not relying on you dropping my reviewed-by tag > to take a look at new changes.) Significant changes. This is only the expected behaviour when significant changes are made to a patch. This is a comment - and the text of the comment isn't changed. > This change is unexpected and does not have anything to do with this patch. > Instead it just seems to undo a change that sneaked into patch #8 > of this series. Thanks - I was misled by closid_num_dirty_rmid existing before the patch with its name in the subject. I'll fix this. Thanks, James