Re: [RFC PATCH v8 01/10] ras: scrub: Add scrub subsystem

[Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>]

On Thu, Apr 25, 2024 at 06:11:13PM +0000, Shiju Jose wrote:
> It is expected to have multiple RAS-specific functionalities other
> than scrubbing  in long run.  Most of the classes in the kernel found
> as  /sys/class/<class-name>/<class-name>X/
> 
> If not, however /sys/class/ras/<module -name>X/<feature> is more
> suitable because there are multiple device instances such as cxl
> devices with scrub control feature.  For example,
> /sys/class/ras/cxlX/scrub

Make it as user-friendly as possible. cxlX is not as user-friendly as

/sys/class/ras/cxl/<mem_accelerator>
		  /<fancy_bla_thing>

and so on.

Yes, you can introduce a special category .../ras/cxl/ if there are
multiple cxl devices which have RAS functionality on them.

> Presently underlying hw driver does the check. I think this will
> become more complex if does in the common rate_store() if we have to
> check against either a list of possible rates or min and max rates.

Ok.

> >> +DEVICE_ATTR_RW(enable_background);
> >> +DEVICE_ATTR_RO(name);
> >> +DEVICE_ATTR_RW(rate);
> >> +DEVICE_ATTR_RO(rate_available);
> >
> >static

Forgot one.

> This is the ras instance id (X) used for scrub control feature, /sys/class/ras/rasX/scrub/

Yeah, as discussed  above.

> >> +static int __init memory_scrub_control_init(void) {
> >> +	return class_register(&scrub_class); }
> >> +subsys_initcall(memory_scrub_control_init);
> >
> >You can't just blindly register this thing without checking whether there are even
> >any hw scrubber devices on the system.
>
> I think it happens only when a dependent module as autoloaded based
> on a scrub device existing with exception of memory scrub control
> built in and who would build this in?

You think or you know?

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette