Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 17 May 2022 14:23:24 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v4 15/21] x86/resctrl: Abstract __rmid_read() | From | Reinette Chatre <> |
| |
Hi James,
On 4/12/2022 5:44 AM, James Morse wrote:
> @@ -180,14 +180,24 @@ static u64 __rmid_read(u32 rmid, enum resctrl_event_id eventid) > * are error bits. > */ > wrmsr(MSR_IA32_QM_EVTSEL, eventid, rmid); > - rdmsrl(MSR_IA32_QM_CTR, val); > + rdmsrl(MSR_IA32_QM_CTR, msr_val); > > - return val; > + if (msr_val & RMID_VAL_ERROR) > + return -EIO; > + if (msr_val & RMID_VAL_UNAVAIL) > + return -EINVAL; > + > + *val = msr_val; > + > + return 0; > } >
In above EIO is used to represent RMID_VAL_ERROR ...
> @@ -343,7 +355,7 @@ static u64 __mon_event_count(u32 rmid, struct rmid_read *rr) > * Code would never reach here because an invalid > * event id would fail the __rmid_read. > */ > - return RMID_VAL_ERROR; > + return -EINVAL; > } > > if (rr->first) {
I understand it can be seen as a symbolic change but could RMID_VAL_ERROR consistently be associated with the same error?
Reinette
| |