lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Jul]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 14/21] x86/intel_rdt/cqm: Add mon_data


On Thu, 6 Jul 2017, Thomas Gleixner wrote:

> On Thu, 6 Jul 2017, Shivappa Vikas wrote:
>> On Sun, 2 Jul 2017, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>>>> +static bool __mon_event_count(u32 rmid, struct rmid_read *rr)
>>>> +{
>>>> + u64 tval;
>>>> +
>>>> + tval = __rmid_read(rmid, rr->evtid);
>>>> + if (tval & (RMID_VAL_ERROR | RMID_VAL_UNAVAIL)) {
>>>> + rr->val = tval;
>>>> + return false;
>>>> + }
>>>> + switch (rr->evtid) {
>>>> + case QOS_L3_OCCUP_EVENT_ID:
>>>> + rr->val += tval;
>>>> + return true;
>>>> + default:
>>>> + return false;
>>>
>>> I have no idea what that return code means.
>>
>> false for the invalid event id and all errors for __rmid_read. (IOW all errors
>> for __mon_event-read)
>
> Sure, but why bool? What's wrong with proper error return codes, so issues
> can be distinguished and potentially propagated in the callchain?

Ok, The error is propagated wih the rr->val actually. is this better?

Hardware throws the RMID_VAL_ERROR (bit 63) when an invalid RMID or
event is written to event select - this case seems similar.

default:
rr->val = RMID_VAL_ERROR;
return -EINVAL;
}

Thanks,
Vikas

>
> Thanks,
>
> tglx
>
>
>
>
>

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-07-11 23:16    [W:0.079 / U:0.136 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site