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 S1757219AbcG0QVO (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 27 Jul 2016 12:21:14 -0400
Received: from mail-it0-f45.google.com ([209.85.214.45]:37869 "EHLO
	mail-it0-f45.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1757067AbcG0QVM (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 27 Jul 2016 12:21:12 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1468371785-53231-14-git-send-email-fenghua.yu@intel.com>
References: <1468371785-53231-1-git-send-email-fenghua.yu@intel.com> <1468371785-53231-14-git-send-email-fenghua.yu@intel.com>
From: Nilay Vaish <nilayvaish@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2016 11:20:31 -0500
Message-ID: <CACbG30_za8t2WOAXVpAZkCaw69Jq_JfPa2n7MBphOeUDgA_ngA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 13/32] Documentation, x86: Documentation for Intel
 resource allocation user interface
To: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <h.peter.anvin@intel.com>,
        Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>, Tejun Heo <tj@kernel.org>,
        Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>, Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@redhat.com>,
        David Carrillo-Cisneros <davidcc@google.com>,
        Ravi V Shankar <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>,
        Vikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@linux.intel.com>,
        Sai Prakhya <sai.praneeth.prakhya@intel.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, x86 <x86@kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 12 July 2016 at 20:02, Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com> wrote:
> +1. Terms
> +========
> +
> +We use the following terms and concepts in this documentation.
> +
> +RDT: Intel Resoure Director Technology
> +
> +CAT: Cache Allocation Technology
> +
> +CDP: Code and Data Prioritization
> +
> +CBM: Cache Bit Mask
> +
> +Cache ID: A cache identification. It is unique in one cache index on the
> +platform. User can find cache ID in cache sysfs interface:
> +/sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/cache/index*/id
> +
> +Share resource domain: A few different resources can share same QoS mask
> +MSRs array. For example, one L2 cache can share QoS MSRs with its next level
> +L3 cache. A domain number represents the L2 cache, the L3 cache, the L2
> +cache's shared cpumask, and the L3 cache's shared cpumask.
> +

I think CLOS ID should be defined here.  Is it same as Cache ID?


> +As one example, CAT L3's schema format is:
> +
> +L3:<cache_id0>=<cbm>;<cache_id1>=<cbm>;...
> +
> +On a two socket machine, L3's schema line could be:
> +
> +L3:0=ff;1=c0
> +
> +which means this line in "schemas" file is for CAT L3, L3 cache id 0's CBM
> +is 0xff, and L3 cache id 1's CBM is 0xc0.
> +
> +If one resource is disabled, its line is not shown in schemas file.
> +
> +The schema line can be expended for situations. L3 cbms format can be
> +expended to CDP enabled L3 cbms format:
> +
> +L3:<cache_id0>=<d_cbm>,<i_cbm>;<cache_id1>=<d_cbm>,<i_cbm>;...
> +
> +Initial value is all ones which means all tasks use all resources initially.
> +

Your example here makes me feel that Cache ID and CLOS ID mean the same thing.


> +7. Some usage examples
> +======================
> +
> +7.1 Example 1 for sharing CLOSID on socket 0 between two partitions
> +
> +Only L3 cbm is enabled. Assume the machine is 2-socket and dual-core without
> +hyperthreading.
> +
> +#mount -t rscctrl rscctrl /sys/fs/rscctrl
> +#cd /sys/fs/rscctrl
> +#mkdir p0 p1
> +#echo "L3:0=3;1=c" > /sys/fs/rscctrl/p0/schemas
> +#echo "L3:0=3;1=3" > /sys/fs/rscctrl/p1/schemas
> +
> +In partition p0, kernel allocates CLOSID 0 for L3 cbm=0x3 on socket 0 and
> +CLOSID 0 for cbm=0xc on socket 1.
> +
> +In partition p1, kernel allocates CLOSID 0 for L3 cbm=0x3 on socket 0 and
> +CLOSID 1 for cbm=0x3 on socket 1.


And over here you have switched to using CLOS ID and you do not
mention Cache ID at all.
As I said above, I think Cache ID and CLOS ID are the same thing.  If
that is the case, I think Cache ID should be completely replaced with
CLOS ID.

--
Nilay