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=-4.2 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,INCLUDES_PATCH,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable 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 67379C4360F for ; Wed, 20 Feb 2019 22:21:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3636020859 for ; Wed, 20 Feb 2019 22:21:59 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1550701319; bh=Fx+VvrlXJ50iEedRTgbrLffXw4FpEao79c3tNUtbcqE=; h=References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Subject:To:Cc:List-ID:From; b=IDC4rrjb0J91cvPU0770QcW/i8Sdd061DRfNo83OX9wlaXO6Blrn59JlcjrmTm+YI qQdSFs+WeMH0h6eXQc6Aw13SljCuW23HKC0IZdnrGgqqAvr1V5GxRX9IdIrWJIkTk/ MQcONVQhVdX+iRftIS25ay3bJbCLpFPtzhgqmT1g= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727459AbfBTWV6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Feb 2019 17:21:58 -0500 Received: from mail-ot1-f66.google.com ([209.85.210.66]:36085 "EHLO mail-ot1-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725804AbfBTWV5 (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Feb 2019 17:21:57 -0500 Received: by mail-ot1-f66.google.com with SMTP id v62so34148752otb.3; Wed, 20 Feb 2019 14:21:57 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=PfRNwRVl7g3bqidrv95AzMgr3KnyTTsf1iUE/PpifHg=; b=XoW6zOZT2kGRjKHMXCQauoWzuslUxFIjHXsd9A7XyA6d1kd4w38JR2d4lTKB93J5A/ QkvizdKi3w1p7nBeyIVSXWmXcTpiVLbIHlpv2R5q6YxuMOE8GjPHKqaHxxkMNqRSRmiV UwPVz0XR5tARDTTYhWTBfv+75cVFXiooarCqrj+e1UITuvFH+mQPL9mnGJSj9ggfaiZz euzvRS7+wpPHPY2JjbLmNYC2t35FxysMJlLzk1QXQjnVzRsqUmYNblBBsXJyHu2/JP8E /W19CjrtrcL/CLhC+l+e33sxpMcs0sa0HEwQvPZAfHNRWgMbE5LGi2tp0O17F7DWFUtQ Szng== X-Gm-Message-State: AHQUAuaXSaMGnYu/Gxm7iVeVGr/WmfVhRZASvH6gbv9XbYTddAgzEnSf LkUXRBn3mokT4NawWpt10OiB1lcsKBn1W5tkuD0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3IbYnyhjUWec6h/ijCvT3Sat82fibfLBId5o8D/Dh7apFdbkV8p7Y0qk3V3QfIBdHfoKJTEwz5vR437BlQkx0LY= X-Received: by 2002:aca:c141:: with SMTP id r62mr7076865oif.160.1550701316742; Wed, 20 Feb 2019 14:21:56 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190214171017.9362-1-keith.busch@intel.com> <20190214171017.9362-8-keith.busch@intel.com> <9ab5d6ba-4cb6-a6f1-894d-d79b77c8bc21@intel.com> In-Reply-To: <9ab5d6ba-4cb6-a6f1-894d-d79b77c8bc21@intel.com> From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" Date: Wed, 20 Feb 2019 23:21:45 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCHv6 07/10] acpi/hmat: Register processor domain to its memory To: Dave Hansen Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Keith Busch , Linux Kernel Mailing List , ACPI Devel Maling List , Linux Memory Management List , Linux API , Greg Kroah-Hartman , Dan Williams Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 11:11 PM Dave Hansen wrote: > > On 2/20/19 2:02 PM, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > >> diff --git a/drivers/acpi/hmat/Kconfig b/drivers/acpi/hmat/Kconfig > >> index c9637e2e7514..08e972ead159 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/acpi/hmat/Kconfig > >> +++ b/drivers/acpi/hmat/Kconfig > >> @@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ > >> config ACPI_HMAT > >> bool "ACPI Heterogeneous Memory Attribute Table Support" > >> depends on ACPI_NUMA > >> + select HMEM_REPORTING > > If you want to do this here, I'm not sure that defining HMEM_REPORTING > > as a user-selectable option is a good idea. In particular, I don't > > really think that setting ACPI_HMAT without it makes a lot of sense. > > Apart from this, the patch looks reasonable to me. > > I guess the question is whether we would want to allow folks to consume > the HMAT inside the kernel while not reporting it out via > HMEM_REPORTING. We have some in-kernel users of the HMAT lined up like > mitigations for memory-side caches. > > It's certainly possible that folks would want to consume those > mitigations without anything in sysfs. They might not even want or need > NUMA support itself, for instance. > > So, what should we do? > > config HMEM_REPORTING > bool # no user-visible prompt > default y if ACPI_HMAT > > So folks can override in their .config, but they don't see a prompt? Maybe it would be better to make HMEM_REPORTING do "select ACPI_HMAT if ACPI". The mitigations could then do that too if they depend on HMAT and ACPI_HMAT need not be user-visible at all.