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 DE09F16C6A0 for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2024 15:26:40 +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=1713454002; cv=none; b=kml0FyiyBHcu21AuBCpMGCClZkHmQxckkToSxBtgKufOGqrKTh1AgSycimtQ9ly8T+hMaYla9RMouaR9//hL+RIw42ZOQBYlzzPN+QkxyZY/+nii4G5D+a6wVEvlyrAzshsNusgk0D4EVIVQ2r0Fp3BV+xKoca3hBhykoEYiHIE= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1713454002; c=relaxed/simple; bh=4xZGfAl8PPKZnPyv64RDCFMMzFWb47GfX2Hu5wQmplk=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=ILx/IOO4l+jCQ4Thk8L77iaSyO1J4LfXaMC+vUclnYhfa7kvgPEOwyyzO9iIPY3/3HHn0N65WuE2cCnXUd/HNE+sHionWqo/VDE4SEo7Sok505qalsYD131A/A8S9ptCI99lror69bT2CuiODGIElXj35QDttDWjJte2qAul5r4= 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 159AB2F; Thu, 18 Apr 2024 08:27:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from e133380.arm.com (e133380.arm.com [10.1.197.52]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id EA36E3F738; Thu, 18 Apr 2024 08:26:36 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 16:26:34 +0100 From: Dave Martin To: Reinette Chatre Cc: James Morse , x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, 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, David Hildenbrand , Rex Nie Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 12/31] x86/resctrl: Move max_{name,data}_width into resctrl code Message-ID: References: <20240321165106.31602-1-james.morse@arm.com> <20240321165106.31602-13-james.morse@arm.com> <3391a909-d8a4-4ee6-9836-b16c0ad8944e@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: <3391a909-d8a4-4ee6-9836-b16c0ad8944e@intel.com> On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 10:16:45PM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote: > Hi Dave, > > On 4/17/2024 7:41 AM, Dave Martin wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 10:38:20AM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote: > >> On 4/11/2024 7:15 AM, Dave Martin wrote: > >>> On Mon, Apr 08, 2024 at 08:19:15PM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote: > >>>> Hi James, > >>>> > >>>> On 3/21/2024 9:50 AM, James Morse wrote: > >>>>> @@ -2595,6 +2601,12 @@ static int schemata_list_add(struct rdt_resource *r, enum resctrl_conf_type type > >>>>> if (cl > max_name_width) > >>>>> max_name_width = cl; > >>>>> > >>>>> + /* > >>>>> + * Choose a width for the resource data based on the resource that has > >>>>> + * widest name and cbm. > >>>> > >>>> Please check series to ensure upper case is used for acronyms. > >>> > >>> [...] > >>> > >>>> Reinette > >>> > >>> This patch is just moving existing code around AFAICT. See: > >>> commit de016df88f23 ("x86/intel_rdt: Update schemata read to show data in tabular format") > >>> > >>> Since no new usage of any term is being introduced here, can it be > >>> left as-is? > >>> > >>> There seem to be other uses of "cbm" with this sense in the resctrl > >>> code already. > >> > >> I am not asking to change all existing usages of these terms but in > >> any new changes, please use upper case for acronyms. > > > > While there is a general argument to be made here, it sounds from this > > like you are not requesting a change to this patch; can you confirm? > > Sorry for confusion. I do think in a small change like this it is a good > opportunity to make sure the style is clean. Since this changes the code > anyway, it might as well ensure the style is clean. So, yes, could > you please use CBM instead of cbm. OK; I had thought that we might be introducing a new inconsistency here by making such a change, but looking at upstream, "CBM" is prevalent in comments in the preexisting x86 code. I should have checked that before; apologies for the unnecessary back-and-forth on this. So, sure, it makes sense to change it. Noted. Cheers ---Dave