On Mon, 16 Jan 2017, Thomas Gleixner wrote:

On Tue, 10 Jan 2017, Vikas Shivappa wrote:
This patch does some changes to get ready to handle more resources like
Memory b/w allocation(MBA).

-Update the control registers only when user changes the controls(cbm for
Cache resources and Mem b/w for memory). Hence not sending IPIs on all
domains when user updates the control vals.
-Introduce next_enabled_resource rather than looping through all
resources while parsing each schemata line. The order of resources
should be anyways the same as the root schemata.
-Return error as soon as we detect a resource not entering all domain
values in schemata rather than waiting till we parse all resources.

That looks all like reasonable optimizations and I have a hard time to
understand why this is a prerequisite for the bandwidth support.

And each of these changes is independent so they should be in seperate
patches.

Ok will split them. Its not a pre requisite for MBA. Should i send as a seperate series ?


+/*
+ * Parameter r must be NULL or pointing to
+ * a valid rdt_resource_all entry.
+ * Points r to the next enabled RDT resource at the end.
+ */
+#define next_enabled_rdt_resource(r)                                   \
+do {                                                                   \
+       if (!r)                                                         \
+               r = rdt_resources_all;                                  \
+       else                                                            \
+               r++;                                                    \
+       for (; r < rdt_resources_all + RDT_NUM_RESOURCES; r++)               \
+               if (r->enabled)                                              \
+                       break;                                          \
+} while (0)


This is crap, really. What the heck is wrong with a proper function?

static struct rdt_resource *get_next_enabled_resource(struct rdt_resource *r)
{
        ....

        return r;
}


Will fix,

Thanks,
Vikas

Thanks,

        tglx

Reply via email to