Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] Documentation/x86: Document resctrl's new sparse_masks

[Fenghua Yu]

On 9/27/23 15:58, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> Hi Babu,
>
> On 9/27/2023 3:47 PM, Moger, Babu wrote:
> > On 9/22/2023 3:48 AM, Maciej Wieczor-Retman wrote:
> > > From: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@xxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > The documentation mentions that non-contiguous bit masks are not
> > > supported in Intel Cache Allocation Technology (CAT).
> > >
> > > Update the documentation on how to determine if sparse bit masks are
> > > allowed in L2 and L3 CAT.
> > >
> > > Mention the file with feature support information is located in
> > > the /sys/fs/resctrl/info/{resource}/ directories and enumerate what
> > > are the possible outputs on file read operation.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > Signed-off-by: Maciej Wieczor-Retman <maciej.wieczor-retman@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > > Changelog v2:
> > > - Change bitmap naming convention to bit mask. (Reinette)
> > >
> > >    Documentation/arch/x86/resctrl.rst | 16 ++++++++++++----
> > >    1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/Documentation/arch/x86/resctrl.rst b/Documentation/arch/x86/resctrl.rst
> > > index cb05d90111b4..4c6421e2aa31 100644
> > > --- a/Documentation/arch/x86/resctrl.rst
> > > +++ b/Documentation/arch/x86/resctrl.rst
> > > @@ -124,6 +124,13 @@ related to allocation:
> > >                "P":
> > >                      Corresponding region is pseudo-locked. No
> > >                      sharing allowed.
> > > +"sparse_masks":
> > > +        Indicates if non-contiguous 1s value in CBM is supported.
> > > +
> > > +            "0":
> > > +                  Only contiguous 1s value in CBM is supported.
> >
> > This is little confusing. How about?
> >
> > Non-contiguous 1s value in CBM is not supported
>
> It is not clear to me how changing it to a double
> negative reduces confusion.
Agree with Reinette.

The original statement is clearer and more direct to explicitly state 
what is supported without introducing a negative assertion (not supported).

Thanks.

-Fenghua