On Thu, 2 Nov 2023, Reinette Chatre wrote:
Hi Ilpo,
On 10/24/2023 2:26 AM, Ilpo Järvinen wrote:
CAT and CMT tests calculate the span size from the n-bits cache allocation on their own.
Add cache_size() helper which calculates size of the cache portion for the given number of bits and use it to replace the existing span calculations. This also prepares for the new CAT test that will need to determine the size of the cache portion also during results processing.
cache_size local variables were renamed out of the way to cache_total_size.
Please do stick to imperative mood ... "Rename cache_size local variables ..."
...
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/resctrl.h b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/resctrl.h index 2f3f0ee439d8..da06b2d492f9 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/resctrl.h +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/resctrl/resctrl.h @@ -117,4 +117,18 @@ int show_cache_info(unsigned long sum_llc_val, int no_of_bits, unsigned long max_diff_percent, unsigned long num_of_runs, bool platform, bool cmt); +/*
- cache_size - Calculate the size of a cache portion
- @cache_size: Cache size in bytes
- @mask: Cache portion mask
- @cache_mask: Full bitmask for the cache
- Return: The size of the cache portion in bytes.
- */
+static inline int cache_size(unsigned long cache_size, unsigned long mask,
unsigned long cache_mask)+{
- return cache_size * count_bits(mask) / count_bits(cache_mask);
+}
#endif /* RESCTRL_H */
The get_cache_size() and cache_size() naming appears similar enough to me to cause confusion. Considering the "portion" term above, what do you think of "cache_portion_size()" or even "cache_portion_bytes()"?
Yes, I'm more than happy to rename them. This naming was what you suggested earlier. (I used cache_alloc_size() or something like that initially and you were against using "alloc" in the name.)