Hi Reinette,

On 2/10/2026 10:17 AM, Reinette Chatre wrote:

Hi Babu,

On 1/28/26 9:44 AM, Moger, Babu wrote:

quoted

On 1/28/2026 11:41 AM, Moger, Babu wrote:

quoted

quoted

On Wed, Jan 28, 2026 at 10:01:39AM -0600, Moger, Babu wrote:

quoted

On 1/27/2026 4:30 PM, Luck, Tony wrote:

Babu,

I've read a bit more of the code now and I think I understand more.

Some useful additions to your explanation.

1) Only one CTRL group can be marked as PLZA

Yes. Correct.

Why limit it to one CTRL_MON group and why not support it for MON groups?

There can be only one PLZA configuration in a system. The values in the 
MSR_IA32_PQR_PLZA_ASSOC register (RMID, RMID_EN, CLOSID, CLOSID_EN) must 
be identical across all logical processors. The only field that may 
differ is PLZA_EN.

I was initially unsure which RMID should be used when PLZA is enabled on 
MON groups.

After re-evaluating, enabling PLZA on MON groups is still feasible:

1. Only one group in the system can have PLZA enabled.
2. If PLZA is enabled on CTRL_MON group then we cannot enable PLZA on 
MON group.
3. If PLZA is enabled on the CTRL_MON group, then the CLOSID and RMID of 
the CTRL_MON group can be written.
4. If PLZA is enabled on a MON group, then the CLOSID of the CTRL_MON 
group can be used, while the RMID of the MON group can be written.

I am thinking this approach should work.

Limiting it to a single CTRL group seems restrictive in a few ways:
1) It requires that the "PLZA" group has a dedicated CLOSID. This reduces the
    number of use cases that can be supported. Consider, for example, an existing
    "high priority" resource group and a "low priority" resource group. The user may
    just want to let the tasks in the "low priority" resource group run as "high priority"
    when in CPL0. This of course may depend on what resources are allocated, for example
    cache may need more care, but if, for example, user is only interested in memory
    bandwidth allocation this seems a reasonable use case?
2) Similar to what Tony [1] mentioned this does not enable what the hardware is
    capable of in terms of number of different control groups/CLOSID that can be
    assigned to MSR_IA32_PQR_PLZA_ASSOC. Why limit PLZA to one CLOSID?
3) The feature seems to support RMID in MSR_IA32_PQR_PLZA_ASSOC similar to
    MSR_IA32_PQR_ASSOC. With this, it should be possible for user space to, for
    example, create a resource group that contains tasks of interest and create
    a monitor group within it that monitors all tasks' bandwidth usage when in CPL0.
    This will give user space better insight into system behavior and from what I can
    tell is supported by the feature but not enabled?

Yes, as long as PLZA is enabled on only one group in the entire system

quoted

quoted

quoted

2) It can't be the root/default group

This is something I added to keep the default group in a un-disturbed,

Why was this needed?

With the new approach mentioned about we can enable in default group also.

quoted

quoted

quoted

3) It can't have sub monitor groups

Why not?

Ditto. With the new approach mentioned about we can enable in default 
group also.

quoted

quoted

quoted

4) It can't be pseudo-locked

Yes.

quoted

Would a potential use case involve putting *all* tasks into the PLZA group? That
would avoid any additional context switch overhead as the PLZA MSR would never
need to change.

Yes. That can be one use case.

quoted

If that is the case, maybe for the PLZA group we should allow user to
do:

# echo '*' > tasks

Dedicating a resource group to "PLZA" seems restrictive while also adding many
complications since this designation makes resource group behave differently and
thus the files need to get extra "treatments" to handle this "PLZA" designation.

I am wondering if it will not be simpler to introduce just one new file, for example
"tasks_cpl0" in both CTRL_MON and MON groups. When user space writes a task ID to the
file it "enables" PLZA for this task and that group's CLOSID and RMID is the associated
task's "PLZA" CLOSID and RMID. This gives user space the flexibility to use the same
resource group to manage user space and kernel space allocations while also supporting
various monitoring use cases. This still supports the "dedicate a resource group to PLZA"
use case where user space can create a new resource group with certain allocations but the
"tasks" file will be empty and "tasks_cpl0" contains the tasks needing to run with
the resource group's allocations when in CPL0.

Yes. We should be able do that. We need both tasks_cpl0 and cpus_cpl0.

We need make sure only one group can configured in the system and not 
allow in other groups when it is already enabled.

Thanks
Babu

Reinette

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/aXpgragcLS2L8ROe@agluck-desk3/ (local)