From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63FE0C43441 for ; Wed, 10 Oct 2018 17:53:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1C99C2086D for ; Wed, 10 Oct 2018 17:53:51 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 1C99C2086D Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727028AbeJKBRC (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Oct 2018 21:17:02 -0400 Received: from mga05.intel.com ([192.55.52.43]:35645 "EHLO mga05.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726780AbeJKBRC (ORCPT ); Wed, 10 Oct 2018 21:17:02 -0400 X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) X-Amp-File-Uploaded: False Received: from fmsmga004.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.48]) by fmsmga105.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 10 Oct 2018 10:53:47 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.54,365,1534834800"; d="scan'208";a="96371058" Received: from rchatre-mobl.amr.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.24.14.109]) ([10.24.14.109]) by fmsmga004.fm.intel.com with ESMTP; 10 Oct 2018 10:53:47 -0700 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/11] arch/x86: Start renaming the rdt files to more generic names To: "Moger, Babu" , "tglx@linutronix.de" , "mingo@redhat.com" , "hpa@zytor.com" , "fenghua.yu@intel.com" , "james.morse@arm.com" , "vikas.shivappa@linux.intel.com" , "tony.luck@intel.com" Cc: "x86@kernel.org" , "peterz@infradead.org" , "pombredanne@nexb.com" , "gregkh@linuxfoundation.org" , "kstewart@linuxfoundation.org" , "bp@suse.de" , "rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com" , "ak@linux.intel.com" , "kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com" , "xiaochen.shen@intel.com" , "colin.king@canonical.com" , "Hurwitz, Sherry" , "Lendacky, Thomas" , "pbonzini@redhat.com" , "dwmw@amazon.co.uk" , "luto@kernel.org" , "jroedel@suse.de" , "jannh@google.com" , "dima@arista.com" , "jpoimboe@redhat.com" , "vkuznets@redhat.com" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" References: <20181005205512.29545-1-babu.moger@amd.com> <20181005205512.29545-2-babu.moger@amd.com> <2fe2e853-47ef-af2a-6906-9ad7a7b8bba9@intel.com> From: Reinette Chatre Message-ID: <6d25a185-66e2-1a54-071a-4937a09c07a8@intel.com> Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 10:53:46 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Babu, On 10/10/2018 7:11 AM, Moger, Babu wrote: > On 10/09/2018 05:01 PM, Reinette Chatre wrote: >> On 10/9/2018 2:17 PM, Moger, Babu wrote: >>> On 10/09/2018 11:39 AM, Reinette Chatre wrote: >>>> On 10/5/2018 1:55 PM, Moger, Babu wrote: >>>>> New generation of AMD processors start support RDT(or QOS) features. >>>>> With more than one vendors supporting these features, it seems more >>>>> appropriate to rename these files. >>>>> >>>>> Signed-off-by: Babu Moger >>>>> --- >>>>> arch/x86/include/asm/{intel_rdt_sched.h => rdt_sched.h} | 0 >>>>> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/Makefile | 6 +++--- >>>>> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/{intel_rdt.c => rdt.c} | 4 ++-- >>>>> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/{intel_rdt.h => rdt.h} | 0 >>>>> .../cpu/{intel_rdt_ctrlmondata.c => rdt_ctrlmondata.c} | 2 +- >>>>> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/{intel_rdt_monitor.c => rdt_monitor.c} | 2 +- >>>>> .../cpu/{intel_rdt_pseudo_lock.c => rdt_pseudo_lock.c} | 6 +++--- >>>>> ...ntel_rdt_pseudo_lock_event.h => rdt_pseudo_lock_event.h} | 2 +- >>>>> .../x86/kernel/cpu/{intel_rdt_rdtgroup.c => rdt_rdtgroup.c} | 4 ++-- >>>>> arch/x86/kernel/process_32.c | 2 +- >>>>> arch/x86/kernel/process_64.c | 2 +- >>>>> 11 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) >>>>> rename arch/x86/include/asm/{intel_rdt_sched.h => rdt_sched.h} (100%) >>>>> rename arch/x86/kernel/cpu/{intel_rdt.c => rdt.c} (99%) >>>>> rename arch/x86/kernel/cpu/{intel_rdt.h => rdt.h} (100%) >>>>> rename arch/x86/kernel/cpu/{intel_rdt_ctrlmondata.c => rdt_ctrlmondata.c} (99%) >>>>> rename arch/x86/kernel/cpu/{intel_rdt_monitor.c => rdt_monitor.c} (99%) >>>>> rename arch/x86/kernel/cpu/{intel_rdt_pseudo_lock.c => rdt_pseudo_lock.c} (99%) >>>>> rename arch/x86/kernel/cpu/{intel_rdt_pseudo_lock_event.h => rdt_pseudo_lock_event.h} (95%) >>>>> rename arch/x86/kernel/cpu/{intel_rdt_rdtgroup.c => rdt_rdtgroup.c} (99%) >>>> >>>> During the RFC it was agreed that "resctrl" will be the neutral name and >>>> "intel_rdt", "amd_qos", or "arm mpam" would be the vendor specific names. >>>> >>>> It is ok to delay that renaming but I think any renaming done from this >>>> point should respect this agreement. >>>> >>>> For example, if you want to rename intel_rdt.c then please rename it to >>>> resctrl.c instead of just rdt.c which does not represent a generic name >>>> as expressed as a goal in the subject of this patch. >>> >>> I knew this was going to bit tricky. I can change all the places where I >>> am touching the code to generic names(change from intel_rdt to "resctrl"). >> >> Yes, "intel_rdt" can be changed to the generic "resctrl" when it is not >> vendor specific. > > Ok. sure. > >> >> As far as all the code you touch is concerned it may be easier and cause >> less confusion for now to just follow the current naming conventions as >> you have done in patches 3 onwards and have it be included in the later >> larger restructuring. > > Yes. I am making sure first 3 patches are renamed to "resctrl" wherever > applicable. Will send the patches soon. > > But I am confused about what you meant by "have it be included in the > later larger restructuring". Can you please elaborate? I was referring to the restructuring that was discussed during your original RFC submission. Specifically, http://lkml.kernel.org/r/874cdcfb-26fa-2bdb-095d-b1b5a88250b9@amd.com http://lkml.kernel.org/r/9500445c-019d-9b77-0b51-48922bf47007@arm.com Reinette