Hi Reinette,
On 7/12/24 17:04, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> Hi Babu,
>
> On 7/3/24 2:48 PM, Babu Moger wrote:
>> ABMC feature details are reported via CPUID Fn8000_0020_EBX_x5.
>> Bits Description
>> 15:0 MAX_ABMC Maximum Supported Assignable Bandwidth
>> Monitoring Counter ID + 1
>>
>> The feature details are documented in APM listed below [1].
>> [1] AMD64 Architecture Programmer's Manual Volume 2: System Programming
>> Publication # 24593 Revision 3.41 section 19.3.3.3 Assignable Bandwidth
>> Monitoring (ABMC).
>
> <insert snippet about what the patch does>
Ok Sure.
>
>>
>> Link: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=206537
>> Signed-off-by: Babu Moger <babu.moger@amd.com>
>> ---
>> v5: Name change num_cntrs to num_mbm_cntrs.
>> Moved abmc_capable to resctrl_mon.
>>
>> v4: Removed resctrl_arch_has_abmc(). Added all the code inline. We dont
>> need to separate this as arch code.
>>
>> v3: Removed changes related to mon_features.
>> Moved rdt_cpu_has to core.c and added new function
>> resctrl_arch_has_abmc.
>> Also moved the fields mbm_assign_capable and mbm_assign_cntrs to
>> rdt_resource. (James)
>>
>> v2: Changed the field name to mbm_assign_capable from abmc_capable.
>> ---
>> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/monitor.c | 12 ++++++++++++
>> include/linux/resctrl.h | 4 ++++
>> 2 files changed, 16 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/monitor.c
>> b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/monitor.c
>> index 795fe91a8feb..87d40f149ebc 100644
>> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/monitor.c
>> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/resctrl/monitor.c
>> @@ -1229,6 +1229,18 @@ int __init rdt_get_mon_l3_config(struct
>> rdt_resource *r)
>> mbm_local_event.configurable = true;
>> mbm_config_rftype_init("mbm_local_bytes_config");
>> }
>> +
>> + if (rdt_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_ABMC)) {
>> + r->mon.abmc_capable = true;
>> + /*
>> + * Query CPUID_Fn80000020_EBX_x05 for number of
>> + * ABMC counters
>> + */
>> + cpuid_count(0x80000020, 5, &eax, &ebx, &ecx, &edx);
>> + r->mon.num_mbm_cntrs = (ebx & 0xFFFF) + 1;
>> + if (WARN_ON(r->mon.num_mbm_cntrs > 64))
>> + r->mon.num_mbm_cntrs = 64;
>> + }
>> }
>> l3_mon_evt_init(r);
>> diff --git a/include/linux/resctrl.h b/include/linux/resctrl.h
>> index e43fc5bb5a3a..62f0f002ef41 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/resctrl.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/resctrl.h
>> @@ -185,10 +185,14 @@ enum resctrl_scope {
>> /**
>> * struct resctrl_mon - Monitoring related data
>> * @num_rmid: Number of RMIDs available
>> + * @num_mbm_cntrs: Number of monitoring counters
>> + * @abmc_capable: Is system capable of supporting monitor assignment?
>> * @evt_list: List of monitoring events
>> */
>> struct resctrl_mon {
>> int num_rmid;
>> + int num_mbm_cntrs;
>> + bool abmc_capable;
>> struct list_head evt_list;
>> };
>>
>
> How about renaming "abmc_capable" to "mbm_cntr_capable? That would,
> (a) connect the capability to the "num_mbm_cntrs" property, and (b)
> remove the AMD marketing name from the resctrl filesystem code that
> will be shared by all architectures.
"mbm_cntr_capable" does not give full meaning of the feature.
How about "mbm_cntr_assignable"?
--
Thanks
Babu Moger