From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1752795AbbEFIbN (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 6 May 2015 04:31:13 -0400
Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:60805 "EHLO mga01.intel.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751285AbbEFIas (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 6 May 2015 04:30:48 -0400
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.13,378,1427785200"; 
   d="scan'208";a="724498137"
Message-ID: <1430901043.18017.56.camel@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/7] x86/intel_rdt: Support cache bit mask for Intel CAT
From: Matt Fleming <matt.fleming@intel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
CC: Vikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@intel.com>,
        Vikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@linux.intel.com>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <x86@kernel.org>, <hpa@zytor.com>,
        <tglx@linutronix.de>, <mingo@kernel.org>, <tj@kernel.org>,
        "Auld, Will" <will.auld@intel.com>, <peter.zijlstra@intel.com>,
        <h.peter.anvin@intel.com>,
        "Juvva, Kanaka D" <kanaka.d.juvva@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 6 May 2015 09:30:43 +0100
In-Reply-To: <20150506080914.GU23123@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <1430530601-16319-1-git-send-email-vikas.shivappa@linux.intel.com>
	 <1430530601-16319-4-git-send-email-vikas.shivappa@linux.intel.com>
	 <20150502184610.GH3007@worktop.Skamania.guest>
	 <alpine.DEB.2.10.1505041014040.6658@vshiva-Udesk>
	 <20150506080914.GU23123@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Organization: Intel Corporation (UK) Ltd. - Registered No. 1134945 - Pipers
 Way, Swindon SN3 1RJ
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.11 (3.12.11-1.fc21) 
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Originating-IP: [163.33.239.182]
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, 2015-05-06 at 10:09 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 
> But we're not implementing an umbrella right? We're implementing Cache
> QoS Enforcement (CQE aka. CAT).
> 
> Why confuse things with calling it random other names?
> 
> From what I understand the whole RDT thing is the umbrella term for
> Cache QoS Monitoring and Enforcement together. CQM is implemented
> elsewhere, this part is only implementing CQE.
> 
> So just call it that, calling it RDT is actively misleading, because it
> explicitly does _NOT_ do the monitoring half of it.

Right, and we're already running into this problem where some of the
function names contain "rdt" and some contain "cat".

How about we go with "intel cache alloc"? We avoid the dreaded TLA-fest,
it clearly matches up with what's in the Software Developer's Manual
(Cache Allocation Technology) and it's pretty simple for people who
haven't read the SDM to understand.