Re: [PATCH 1/1] x86/cqm: Cqm requirements

[Shivappa Vikas]

On Tue, 7 Mar 2017, Stephane Eranian wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 12:04 PM, Luck, Tony <tony.luck@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > That's all nice and good, but I still have no coherent explanation why
> > > measuring across allocation domains makes sense.
> >
> > Is this in reaction to this one?
> >
> > > > 5)      Put multiple threads into a single measurement group
> >
> > If we fix it to say "threads from the same CAT group" does it fix things?
> Inside a CAT partition, there may be multiple tasks split into
> different cgroups.
> We need the ability to monitor groups of tasks individually within that CAT
> partition. I think this is what this bullet is about.

The #8 covers that I think (or what we intended for 5..) ?

8)      Can get measurements for subsets of tasks in a CAT group (to find the
threads hogging the resources).

Thanks,
Vikas

> > We'd like to have measurement groups use a single RMID ... if we
> > allowed tasks from different CAT groups in the same measurement
> > group we wouldn't be able to split the numbers back to report the
> > right overall total for each of the CAT groups.
> >
> > -Tony