Re: [PATCHv6 07/10] acpi/hmat: Register processor domain to its memory
From: Rafael J. Wysocki
Date: Wed Feb 20 2019 - 17:21:59 EST
On Wed, Feb 20, 2019 at 11:11 PM Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxx> 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.