From: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>
To: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
Cc: Fenghua Yu <fenghuay@nvidia.com>,
Maciej Wieczor-Retman <maciej.wieczor-retman@intel.com>,
Peter Newman <peternewman@google.com>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Babu Moger <babu.moger@amd.com>,
"Drew Fustini" <dfustini@baylibre.com>,
Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>, Chen Yu <yu.c.chen@intel.com>,
David E Box <david.e.box@intel.com>, <x86@kernel.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <patches@lists.linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v11 01/23] x86/resctrl: Give better names to X86_FEATURE flags for monitoring
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2026 17:06:44 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aqNGFA6JtddxEn54@agluck-desk3> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2a814a14-2717-4363-838a-6585557baf1a@intel.com>
On Wed, Sep 09, 2026 at 08:48:01PM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> Hi Tony,
>
> Please switch the subject prefix to "x86/cpufeatures:" to highlight the
> subsystem changed. Considering that, the short description could mention
> resctrl instead, for example:
> x86/cpufeatures: Give better names to flags used by resctrl
>
> Although, I do have a question about one rename and depending on that
> outcome the subject could be made more specific.
>
> On 8/31/26 10:43 AM, Tony Luck wrote:
> > The feature flags for enumeration of Resource Director Technology (RDT)
> > capabilities were chosen when the only feature was LLC cache occupancy
> > monitoring and they were given names using the abbreviation CQM for
> > Cache Quality of Service Monitoring.
> >
> > Additional monitoring features have been added to CPUs and the names
> > are now more likely to confuse than inform the purpose of these flags.
> >
> > Rename X86_FEATURE_CQM to X86_FEATURE_RDT_M (to match the Intel Software
> > Developer's Manual, and for symmetry with X86_FEATURE_RDT_A).
> >
> > Rename X86_FEATURE_CQM_LLC to X86_FEATURE_L3_MON since it enumerates
> > that some L3 monitoring features may be present.
>
> Considering LLC as synonym for L3 it is not obvious why this rename is needed
> (more below).
I'm concerned about the "CQM" string in the name. This stands for "Cache
QoS Monitoring" according to the original commit that added it:
cbc82b172638 ("x86: Add support for Intel Cache QoS Monitoring (CQM) detection")
This made perfect sense when the only feature was LLC cache occupancy.
That's very clearly a useful metric for anyone interested in cache
quality of service.
But the next two monitoring features added to CPUID leaf 0xF subleaf 0x1
were memory bandwidth monitoring of local & total traffic. These are
only peripherally connected to cache quality of service.
I realize that this argument is somewhat undercut by the Linux naming of
those features with CQM substrings:
#define X86_FEATURE_CQM_MBM_TOTAL (11*32+ 2) /* "cqm_mbm_total" LLC Total MBM monitoring */
#define X86_FEATURE_CQM_MBM_LOCAL (11*32+ 3) /* "cqm_mbm_local" LLC Local MBM monitoring */
But those seem wrong too.
> >
> > Add missing dependency to cpuid_deps[].
>
> nit: dependency -> dependencies
>
> > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h
> > index f70ee74b5f92..6a7f0adb123e 100644
> > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h
> > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h
>
> ...
>
> > @@ -285,7 +285,7 @@
> > *
> > * Reuse free bits when adding new feature flags!
> > */
> > -#define X86_FEATURE_CQM_LLC (11*32+ 0) /* "cqm_llc" LLC QoS if 1 */
> > +#define X86_FEATURE_L3_MON (11*32+ 0) /* "cqm_llc" LLC QoS if 1 */
>
> The original name matched the description and since the description needed no changing it
> is not clear why the feature name needed to change? I do see some redundancy in the name with
> "LLC" as well "cache" making an appearance, but none of that is inaccurate, is it? The changelog
> claims that the name confuses the purpose. How does X86_FEATURE_CQM_LLC confuse the purpose of
> the flag?
See above ...
>
> > #define X86_FEATURE_CQM_OCCUP_LLC (11*32+ 1) /* "cqm_occup_llc" LLC occupancy monitoring */
> > #define X86_FEATURE_CQM_MBM_TOTAL (11*32+ 2) /* "cqm_mbm_total" LLC Total MBM monitoring */
> > #define X86_FEATURE_CQM_MBM_LOCAL (11*32+ 3) /* "cqm_mbm_local" LLC Local MBM monitoring */
> Reinette
>
-Tony
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-11 0:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 58+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-31 17:43 [PATCH v11 00/23] Allow AET to use PMT as loadable module Tony Luck
2026-08-31 17:43 ` [PATCH v11 01/23] x86/resctrl: Give better names to X86_FEATURE flags for monitoring Tony Luck
2026-09-10 3:48 ` Reinette Chatre
2026-09-11 0:06 ` Luck, Tony [this message]
2026-09-11 15:56 ` Reinette Chatre
2026-09-11 18:21 ` Luck, Tony
2026-09-11 22:51 ` Reinette Chatre
2026-08-31 17:44 ` [PATCH v11 02/23] x86/resctrl: Check if monitoring features are enabled Tony Luck
2026-09-10 3:52 ` Reinette Chatre
2026-09-11 19:11 ` Luck, Tony
2026-09-11 23:08 ` Reinette Chatre
2026-08-31 17:44 ` [PATCH v11 03/23] x86/resctrl: Enumerate monitor features in rdt_get_l3_mon_config() Tony Luck
2026-09-10 3:54 ` Reinette Chatre
2026-08-31 17:44 ` [PATCH v11 04/23] x86/resctrl: Apply Intel MBM quirk from rdt_get_l3_mon_config() Tony Luck
2026-09-10 3:55 ` Reinette Chatre
2026-08-31 17:44 ` [PATCH v11 05/23] x86/resctrl: Delete resctrl_cpu_detect() Tony Luck
2026-08-31 17:44 ` [PATCH v11 06/23] arm,x86,fs/resctrl: Replace architecture resctrl_arch_{alloc,mon}_capable() Tony Luck
2026-09-10 3:56 ` Reinette Chatre
2026-08-31 17:44 ` [PATCH v11 07/23] x86/resctrl: Add special case for Intel Haswell enumeration Tony Luck
2026-09-10 3:56 ` Reinette Chatre
2026-08-31 17:44 ` [PATCH v11 08/23] x86/resctrl: Delete rdt_alloc_capable and rdt_mon_capable Tony Luck
2026-09-10 3:57 ` Reinette Chatre
2026-09-14 17:18 ` Luck, Tony
2026-09-14 20:50 ` Reinette Chatre
2026-08-31 17:44 ` [PATCH v11 09/23] fs/resctrl: Remove redundant calls to resctrl_mon_capable() Tony Luck
2026-09-10 3:57 ` Reinette Chatre
2026-08-31 17:44 ` [PATCH v11 10/23] x86/resctrl: Honor rdt=perf option to force enable AET perf events Tony Luck
2026-08-31 17:44 ` [PATCH v11 11/23] fs/resctrl: Add interface to disable a monitor event Tony Luck
2026-09-10 3:58 ` Reinette Chatre
2026-08-31 17:44 ` [PATCH v11 12/23] arm,x86,fs/resctrl: Handle change in number of RMIDs on each mount Tony Luck
2026-09-10 4:01 ` Reinette Chatre
2026-08-31 17:44 ` [PATCH v11 13/23] x86/resctrl: Handle systems when AET is the only resource Tony Luck
2026-09-10 4:04 ` Reinette Chatre
2026-08-31 17:44 ` [PATCH v11 14/23] x86/resctrl: Enforce system RMID limit on AET event groups Tony Luck
2026-09-10 4:05 ` Reinette Chatre
2026-09-14 21:33 ` Luck, Tony
2026-09-14 22:03 ` Reinette Chatre
2026-09-14 23:21 ` Luck, Tony
2026-09-14 23:49 ` Reinette Chatre
2026-08-31 17:44 ` [PATCH v11 15/23] x86/resctrl: Add PMT registration API for AET enumeration callbacks Tony Luck
2026-08-31 17:44 ` [PATCH v11 16/23] platform/x86/intel/pmt: Register enumeration functions with resctrl Tony Luck
2026-09-01 11:11 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2026-08-31 17:44 ` [PATCH v11 17/23] arm,x86/resctrl: Resolve INTEL_PMT_TELEMETRY symbols at runtime Tony Luck
2026-09-10 4:07 ` Reinette Chatre
2026-08-31 17:44 ` [PATCH v11 18/23] fs/resctrl: Call arch code for every mount Tony Luck
2026-09-10 4:07 ` Reinette Chatre
2026-08-31 17:44 ` [PATCH v11 19/23] x86/resctrl: Export interface to report telemetry unbind/remove Tony Luck
2026-09-10 4:08 ` Reinette Chatre
2026-08-31 17:44 ` [PATCH v11 20/23] platform/x86/intel/pmt: Inform resctrl when MMIO maps are being removed Tony Luck
2026-09-01 11:09 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2026-09-10 4:09 ` Reinette Chatre
2026-08-31 17:44 ` [PATCH v11 21/23] x86/resctrl: Require 64-bit x86 for resctrl support Tony Luck
2026-09-10 4:09 ` Reinette Chatre
2026-08-31 17:44 ` [PATCH v11 22/23] x86/resctrl: Simplify Kconfig options for resctrl Tony Luck
2026-09-10 4:09 ` Reinette Chatre
2026-08-31 17:44 ` [PATCH v11 23/23] x86/resctrl: Document telemetry mount timing caveat Tony Luck
2026-09-10 4:10 ` Reinette Chatre
2026-09-01 19:53 ` [PATCH v11 00/23] Allow AET to use PMT as loadable module Luck, Tony
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=aqNGFA6JtddxEn54@agluck-desk3 \
--to=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=Dave.Martin@arm.com \
--cc=babu.moger@amd.com \
--cc=david.e.box@intel.com \
--cc=dfustini@baylibre.com \
--cc=fenghuay@nvidia.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maciej.wieczor-retman@intel.com \
--cc=patches@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=peternewman@google.com \
--cc=reinette.chatre@intel.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--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®