Re: Initial testing of MPAM patches

[James Morse]

Hi Carl,

On 18/08/2023 17:15, Carl Worth wrote:
> James Morse <james.morse@xxxxxxx> writes:
>> On 18/08/2023 15:13, Carl Worth wrote:

>>> 4. The current schemata allows for cache portion, but not cache capacity
>>
>> See KNOWN_ISSUES:
>> | Only features that match what resctrl already supports are supported.
>> | This is very deliberate.
> ...
>>>    Is this due to a limitation in mapping MPAM to the current resctrl
>>>    interface?
>>
>> It is. Getting feature parity with x86 is the critical path to getting this upstream.
>> Supporting other bits of MPAM can come next - we'd need a discussion with Intel about how
>> any changes should be done, so that they can support them too if they ever have similar
>> features.
>>
>> This conversation can't happen until we have some support upstream.
>
> Got it. This approach makes sense to me, and it's good for me to
> understand what limitations exist in the current implementation and why.

There is some noise around having a discussion about how we make resctrl work on wildly
different platforms, maybe at plumbers, but there is nothing solid yet.
Can I share your name as an interested party?


>>> 5. Linked-list corruption with missing cache entries in PPTT
>>>
>>>    At one point, I tried booting with the MPAM ACPI table populated
>>>    for my L3 cache, but without the necessary entries in the PPTT ACPI
>>>    table. The driver fell over with linked-list corruption, halting
>>>    Linux boot. I'll follow up this report with more details.
>>
>> This kind of thing won't have seen much testing. Any details you can
>> share would help!
>
> Yeah, I figured as much. Since I can replicate this I don't think it
> should be too hard for me to give in and root-cause this bug.
>
> Thanks again for the quick response. I'll do my next testing against
> more recent code, and I should be able to follow-up against some
> specific patches for the couple of bugs I identified above and that I'll
> look closer into.

Thanks,


> Beyond that, I hope to be able to provide some Reviewed-by and Tested-by
> soon.

Great! Could you do that against the most recent branch on kernel.org?


> I see that you've been going several rounds on the earlier portions of
> this patch set, (the parts that refactor resctrl to prepare for
> things). I trust that you've got that part of the process in hand?

Well, its been going on for years.


> Otherwise, let me know if there's anything I can do to help with there.

Any review or testing of those patches would help. The maintainer needs some indication
that people want this stuff, and it's not just me!

I CC you on the patches, but lately I've been getting 'inbox full' bounces from your mail
server.


> Again, I haven't been looking into details of those patches yet, just
> testing to ensure they work, (and so far, the generic parts of resctrl
> seem to be working just fine for me).

Good to know!


Thanks,

James
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you.