Re: [PATCH v2 01/11] arch/x86: Start renaming the rdt files to more generic names

[Moger, Babu]

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.moger@xxxxxxx>
>>>> ---
>>>>  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
> 
>