[libvirt] [PATCH 15/16] tests: Add tests for caches into vircaps2xmltest

[Martin Kletzander]

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 09:23:39PM +0800, Eli Qiao wrote:
>
>> >
>> > How about for l3:
>> > <control min="2816" avail=“56320” cbm_len=“20” scope=‘both’ reserved=“2816"/>
>> >
>>
>>
>> Well, yes, kind of what you had in your patches. Wasn't it without the
>> 'cbm_len' and 'avail'? The 'cbm_len' is avail/min, so it's redundant
>> and avail is the same as the size of the whole cache, right? Also
>> 'reserved' should not be there as that would have to be refreshed every
>> time the info is gathered and that's not what capabilities are for.
>> Also, if we say 'unified' instead of 'both', it sounds little more
>> consistent.
>>
>> So basically, I'm thinking we were somewhere along the lines of:
>>
>> <control min='2816' unit='B' scope=‘unified’/>
>>
>> Or do I remember it wrong?
>oh yeah, right!
>
>for scope, it’s okay to use 'unified' to instead of ‘both’
>for CDP enabled case would it be ?
>
>1)
> <control min='2816' unit='B' scope=‘data’/>
> <control min='2816' unit='B' scope=‘instruction’/>
>

I like this ^^.

>or
>
>2)
>
><control min='2816' unit='B' scope=‘data+instruction’/>
>
>or
>3)
>
><control min='2816' unit='B' scope=‘cdp’/>
>
>?
>
>A correction, that would be <control min=‘2816 * 1024' unit='B' scope=‘unified’/>
>
>the unit B is kinds of small for l3 cache.
>

Well, in that case just use unit='KiB' in case it's divisible.

>Thx Eli.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/attachments/20170331/7e530a67/attachment-0001.sig>