On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 10:19:41AM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> Hi Greg,
>
> On 5/23/2018 1:05 AM, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 02:02:37PM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> >> On 5/22/2018 12:43 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> >>> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 04:29:22AM -0700, Reinette Chatre
On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 10:19:41AM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> Hi Greg,
>
> On 5/23/2018 1:05 AM, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 02:02:37PM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> >> On 5/22/2018 12:43 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> >>> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 04:29:22AM -0700, Reinette Chatre
Hi Greg,
On 5/23/2018 1:05 AM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 02:02:37PM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
>> On 5/22/2018 12:43 PM, Greg KH wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 04:29:22AM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
+ ret = strtobool(buf, );
+ if (ret == 0 && bv) {
+
Hi Greg,
On 5/23/2018 1:05 AM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 02:02:37PM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
>> On 5/22/2018 12:43 PM, Greg KH wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 04:29:22AM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
+ ret = strtobool(buf, );
+ if (ret == 0 && bv) {
+
On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 02:02:37PM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> Hi Greg,
>
> Thank you very much for taking a look.
>
> On 5/22/2018 12:43 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 04:29:22AM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> >> @@ -149,6 +151,9 @@ struct pseudo_lock_region {
> >>
On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 02:02:37PM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> Hi Greg,
>
> Thank you very much for taking a look.
>
> On 5/22/2018 12:43 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 04:29:22AM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> >> @@ -149,6 +151,9 @@ struct pseudo_lock_region {
> >>
Hi Greg,
Thank you very much for taking a look.
On 5/22/2018 12:43 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 04:29:22AM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
>> @@ -149,6 +151,9 @@ struct pseudo_lock_region {
>> unsigned intline_size;
>> unsigned intsize;
>>
Hi Greg,
Thank you very much for taking a look.
On 5/22/2018 12:43 PM, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 04:29:22AM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
>> @@ -149,6 +151,9 @@ struct pseudo_lock_region {
>> unsigned intline_size;
>> unsigned intsize;
>>
On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 04:29:22AM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> @@ -149,6 +151,9 @@ struct pseudo_lock_region {
> unsigned intline_size;
> unsigned intsize;
> void*kmem;
> +#ifdef CONFIG_INTEL_RDT_DEBUGFS
> + struct dentry
On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 04:29:22AM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> @@ -149,6 +151,9 @@ struct pseudo_lock_region {
> unsigned intline_size;
> unsigned intsize;
> void*kmem;
> +#ifdef CONFIG_INTEL_RDT_DEBUGFS
> + struct dentry
There is no simple yes/no test to determine if pseudo-locking was
successful. In order to test pseudo-locking we expose a debugfs file for
each pseudo-locked region that will record the latency of reading the
pseudo-locked memory at a stride of 32 bytes (hardcoded). These numbers
will give us an
There is no simple yes/no test to determine if pseudo-locking was
successful. In order to test pseudo-locking we expose a debugfs file for
each pseudo-locked region that will record the latency of reading the
pseudo-locked memory at a stride of 32 bytes (hardcoded). These numbers
will give us an
12 matches
Mail list logo