Re: [PATCH v5 02/24] x86/resctrl: Access per-rmid structures by index
From: James Morse
Date: Thu Aug 24 2023 - 12:52:37 EST
Hi Reinette,
On 09/08/2023 23:32, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> On 7/28/2023 9:42 AM, James Morse wrote:
>> @@ -377,14 +399,17 @@ static void add_rmid_to_limbo(struct rmid_entry *entry)
>>
>> void free_rmid(u32 closid, u32 rmid)
>> {
>> + u32 idx = resctrl_arch_rmid_idx_encode(closid, rmid);
>> struct rmid_entry *entry;
>>
>> - if (!rmid)
>> - return;
>> -
>> lockdep_assert_held(&rdtgroup_mutex);
>>
>> - entry = __rmid_entry(closid, rmid);
>> + /* do not allow the default rmid to be free'd */
>> + if (idx == resctrl_arch_rmid_idx_encode(RESCTRL_RESERVED_CLOSID,
>> + RESCTRL_RESERVED_RMID))
>> + return;
>> +
> Why is this encoding necessary? Can the provided function parameters
> not be tested directly against RESCTRL_RESERVED_CLOSID and
> RESCTRL_RESERVED_RMID ?
Doing this by encoding means if the architecture code supplies an
resctrl_arch_rmid_idx_encode() that ignores the closid, this reduces down to:
| if (rmid == RESCTRL_RESERVED_RMID)
which is what the code did before. I'll add a comment:
| /*
| * Do not allow RESCTRL_RESERVED_RMID to be free'd. Comparing by index
| * allows architectures that ignore the closid parameter to avoid an
| * unnecessary check.
| */
Thanks,
James