Hi Reinette, On 10/09/2018 05:01 PM, Reinette Chatre wrote: > Hi Babu, > > On 10/9/2018 2:17 PM, Moger, Babu wrote: >> On 10/09/2018 11:39 AM, Reinette Chatre wrote: >>> Hi Babu, >>> >>> 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 <babu.mo...@amd.com> >>>> --- >>>> 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? > >> Also lets change the "texts" which are visible to user to make it more >> generic. > > Could you please elaborate what you mean with "texts" here? Are you > referring to the pr_info() found in intel_rdt_late_init()? Here it may > be good to also change to print "RESCTRL %s allocation > detected"/"RESCTRL %s monitoring detected" - the resource names printed > are already generic. Yes. I meant pr_info text. Will change it to print "RESCTRL" > >> But "rdt" has been used generously in multiple files(like rdt_resource, >> rdt_domain etc). Changing those definitions and functions will be messier. >> I will not worry about it now. Thoughts? > > I agree. My comments were specific to the first two patches of this > series that started doing the renaming but not using the agreed upon > naming - especially since both those patches claim to transition to > generic names. Could just these two patches be modified to change > "intel_rdt" to "resctrl" instead of "intel_rdt" to "rdt" as it currently > does? Sure. Will take care of that. > > Reinette > >