On 24.03.23 17:56, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Mon, Mar 06, 2023 at 05:34:19PM +0100, Juergen Gross wrote: >> Modern CPUs all share the same MTRR interface implemented via >> generic_mtrr_ops. >> >> At several places in MTRR code this generic interface is deduced via >> is_cpu(INTEL) tests, which is only working due to X86_VENDOR_INTEL >> being 0 (the is_cpu() macro is testing mtrr_if->vendor, which isn't >> explicitly set in generic_mtrr_ops). >> >> Fix that by replacing the is_cpu(INTEL) tests with testing for mtrr_if >> to be &generic_mtrr_ops. > > Two things: > > * is_cpu() checks also whether mtrr_if is set. And we don't set it for > all vendors. I wanted to replace that thing with a vendor check recently > but there's that little issue. The is_cpu() checks are either in functions reachable only with mtrr_if being set, or are testing for INTEL, which is replaced by the test of mtrr_if being &generic_mtrr_ops as written in the commit message. > I guess for the cases where we have the generic MTRR implementation, we > can safely assume that mtrr_if is set. Which leads me to the second > thing: > > * If you're going to test for &generic_mtrr_ops, then you can just as > well do > > cpu_feature_enabled(X86_FEATURE_MTRR) > > which is a lot more telling. Yes, I think this is true. > >> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mtrr/mtrr.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mtrr/mtrr.c >> index 5fe62ee0361b..0c83990501f5 100644 >> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mtrr/mtrr.c >> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/mtrr/mtrr.c >> @@ -108,14 +108,12 @@ static int have_wrcomb(void) >> /* This function returns the number of variable MTRRs */ >> static void __init set_num_var_ranges(bool use_generic) >> { >> - unsigned long config = 0, dummy; >> + unsigned long config, dummy; >> >> if (use_generic) >> rdmsr(MSR_MTRRcap, config, dummy); >> - else if (is_cpu(AMD) || is_cpu(HYGON)) >> - config = 2; >> - else if (is_cpu(CYRIX) || is_cpu(CENTAUR)) >> - config = 8; >> + else >> + config = mtrr_if->var_regs; >> >> num_var_ranges = config & 0xff; >> } > > Since you're touching this function, you might simply expand its body in > its only call site in mtrr_bp_init(), put a comment above the expanded > code and remove that function. Okay. Juergen