Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 24 Apr 2023 18:12:29 +0300 (EEST) | From | Ilpo Järvinen <> | Subject | RE: [PATCH v4 7/7] x86/resctrl: Add debug files when mounted with debug option |
| |
On Fri, 21 Apr 2023, Moger, Babu wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@linux.intel.com> > > Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2023 3:59 AM > > To: Moger, Babu <Babu.Moger@amd.com> > > Cc: corbet@lwn.net; Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>; > > tglx@linutronix.de; mingo@redhat.com; bp@alien8.de; fenghua.yu@intel.com; > > dave.hansen@linux.intel.com; x86@kernel.org; hpa@zytor.com; > > paulmck@kernel.org; akpm@linux-foundation.org; quic_neeraju@quicinc.com; > > rdunlap@infradead.org; damien.lemoal@opensource.wdc.com; > > songmuchun@bytedance.com; peterz@infradead.org; jpoimboe@kernel.org; > > pbonzini@redhat.com; chang.seok.bae@intel.com; > > pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com; jmattson@google.com; > > daniel.sneddon@linux.intel.com; Das1, Sandipan <Sandipan.Das@amd.com>; > > tony.luck@intel.com; james.morse@arm.com; linux-doc@vger.kernel.org; > > LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>; bagasdotme@gmail.com; > > eranian@google.com; christophe.leroy@csgroup.eu; jarkko@kernel.org; > > adrian.hunter@intel.com; quic_jiles@quicinc.com; peternewman@google.com > > Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 7/7] x86/resctrl: Add debug files when mounted with > > debug option > > > > On Wed, 19 Apr 2023, Moger, Babu wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > On 4/19/23 08:20, Ilpo Järvinen wrote: > > > > On Mon, 17 Apr 2023, Babu Moger wrote: > > > > > > > >> Add the debug files to the resctrl hierarchy. > > > >> > > > >> Signed-off-by: Babu Moger <babu.moger@amd.com> > > > >> --- > > > >> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/internal.h | 1 + > > > >> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/rdtgroup.c | 54 > > +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- > > > >> 2 files changed, 54 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > >> > > > >> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/internal.h > > > >> b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/internal.h > > > >> index 1eac07ebc31b..855109abb480 100644 > > > >> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/internal.h > > > >> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/internal.h > > > >> @@ -288,6 +288,7 @@ struct rdtgroup { > > > >> #define RFTYPE_TOP BIT(4) > > > >> #define RFTYPE_RES_CACHE BIT(5) > > > >> #define RFTYPE_RES_MB BIT(6) > > > >> +#define RFTYPE_DEBUG BIT(7) > > > >> #define RFTYPE_CTRL_INFO (RFTYPE_INFO | > > RFTYPE_CTRL) > > > >> #define RFTYPE_MON_INFO (RFTYPE_INFO | > > RFTYPE_MON) > > > >> #define RFTYPE_TOP_INFO (RFTYPE_INFO | > > RFTYPE_TOP) > > > >> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/rdtgroup.c > > > >> b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/rdtgroup.c > > > >> index 15ded0dd5b09..1ec4359348c2 100644 > > > >> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/rdtgroup.c > > > >> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/rdtgroup.c > > > >> @@ -1880,6 +1880,7 @@ static struct rftype res_common_files[] = { > > > >> .mode = 0444, > > > >> .kf_ops = &rdtgroup_kf_single_ops, > > > >> .seq_show = rdtgroup_rmid_show, > > > >> + .fflags = RFTYPE_BASE | RFTYPE_DEBUG, > > > >> }, > > > >> { > > > >> .name = "schemata", > > > >> @@ -1909,6 +1910,7 @@ static struct rftype res_common_files[] = { > > > >> .mode = 0444, > > > >> .kf_ops = &rdtgroup_kf_single_ops, > > > >> .seq_show = rdtgroup_closid_show, > > > >> + .fflags = RFTYPE_CTRL_BASE | RFTYPE_DEBUG, > > > >> }, > > > >> > > > >> }; > > > >> @@ -2420,6 +2422,49 @@ static int mkdir_mondata_all(struct > > kernfs_node *parent_kn, > > > >> struct rdtgroup *prgrp, > > > >> struct kernfs_node **mon_data_kn); > > > >> > > > >> +static void resctrl_add_debug_files(void) { > > > >> + struct rftype *rfts, *rft; > > > >> + int len; > > > >> + > > > >> + rfts = res_common_files; > > > >> + len = ARRAY_SIZE(res_common_files); > > > >> + > > > >> + lockdep_assert_held(&rdtgroup_mutex); > > > >> + > > > >> + for (rft = rfts; rft < rfts + len; rft++) { > > > >> + if (rft->fflags & RFTYPE_DEBUG) { > > > >> + rft->fflags &= ~RFTYPE_DEBUG; > > > > > > > > I don't fully follow why you need to play with ->fflags like this. > > > > > > > > Is it for the ->fflags test in rdtgroup_add_files()? Can't you just > > > > do some extra masking there for RFTYPE_DEBUG based on resctrl_debug > > > > which you already keep? > > > > > > Actually with this change, I can remove all these tricks here. > > > I don't have to change the check "if (rft->fflags && ((fflags & > > > rft->fflags) == rft->fflags)) {" > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/rdtgroup.c > > > b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/rdtgroup.c > > > index 1ec4359348c2..b560c44817bb 100644 > > > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/rdtgroup.c > > > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/rdtgroup.c > > > @@ -1925,6 +1925,9 @@ static int rdtgroup_add_files(struct kernfs_node > > > *kn, unsigned long fflags) > > > > > > lockdep_assert_held(&rdtgroup_mutex); > > > > > > + if (resctrl_debug) > > > + fflags |= RFTYPE_DEBUG; > > > > Yes, looks good. > > > > It matches to the idea I had in my mind but doesn't require putting it > > into the if condition itself. > > Without if condition? How? Let me know.
I was referring to the if condition within the loop, not to doing it without some conditional (I had an (resctrl_debug ? RFTYPE_DEBUG : 0) construct in my mind).
To remove if, it would, of course, be possible to use another static file-level variable but it doesn't seem justified. I think what you proposed is fine for this use and looks clean.
-- i. | |