From: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
To: "Chen, Yu C" <yu.c.chen@intel.com>,
"Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>, <x86@kernel.org>,
Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Babu Moger <babu.moger@amd.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org>,
Hongyu Ning <hongyu.ning@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] selftests/resctrl: Allow CAT testing when no exclusive cache exists
Date: Tue, 26 May 2026 19:24:55 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <c1c9c019-81b2-4d6f-a2b6-30e63c99efb1@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <a5473762-fbd8-4aa9-85ae-8bc8108e1d3c@intel.com>
Hi Chenyu,
On 5/26/26 6:57 PM, Chen, Yu C wrote:
> My thinking was that shareable_bits only describes portions that may
> be shared with non-CPU agents, and on an otherwise idle test system
> the CAT miss-rate trend can still be observed even if all ways are
> marked shareable. But I agree that this is not a good assumption for
> kselftest pass/fail.
>
> So I agree that falling back to the full CBM is not the right fix for
> this test. I will change the patch to skip L3_CAT when no exclusive
> cache portion is available, with a message explaining that the performance
> test cannot run reliably because all cache portions are shareable.
Sounds like https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20260526024251.7895-1-icheng@nvidia.com/
does what you need.
>
> For platforms where all cache ways are marked shareable, do you think
> providing a extra parameter to ask cat_test to "ignore" the share
> restriction is acceptable?
While resctrl tests support command line arguments I do not know if they
are actually being used. During a previous rework we found that they were
not behaving as intended and we did not receive any complaints. Even if
somebody uses the hypothetical "ignore" parameter I do not see how the test
result can be trusted unless this is done as part of some hardware validation
that resctrl selftests do not aim to support. resctrl selftests are intended to
test the resctrl kernel subsystem.
I think effort is better spent on creating an actual CAT functional test.
For reference: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20250616082453.3725-1-ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com/
Reinette
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-05-27 2:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-05-23 10:17 Chen Yu
2026-05-25 10:01 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2026-05-25 11:59 ` Chen, Yu C
2026-05-26 15:25 ` Reinette Chatre
2026-05-27 1:57 ` Chen, Yu C
2026-05-27 2:24 ` Reinette Chatre [this message]
2026-05-27 4:52 ` Chen, Yu C
2026-05-27 9:49 ` Ilpo Järvinen
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=c1c9c019-81b2-4d6f-a2b6-30e63c99efb1@intel.com \
--to=reinette.chatre@intel.com \
--cc=Dave.Martin@arm.com \
--cc=babu.moger@amd.com \
--cc=hongyu.ning@linux.intel.com \
--cc=ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=james.morse@arm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tony.luck@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®