From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756257AbZELQmS (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 May 2009 12:42:18 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753500AbZELQmG (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 May 2009 12:42:06 -0400 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:44046 "EHLO terminus.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754164AbZELQmE (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 May 2009 12:42:04 -0400 Message-ID: <4A09A688.6080603@zytor.com> Date: Tue, 12 May 2009 09:40:40 -0700 From: "H. Peter Anvin" User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080501) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Borislav Petkov CC: Jaswinder Singh Rajput , Ingo Molnar , x86 maintainers , LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip] x86: cpu/proc.c adding extended_cpuid_level for /proc/cpuinfo References: <1242112482.3283.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090512133950.GA15474@aftab> <1242136177.14832.0.camel@ht.satnam> <20090512141027.GA19143@aftab> In-Reply-To: <20090512141027.GA19143@aftab> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Borislav Petkov wrote: >>> >> why we need cpuid_level ? > > It is already visible in userspace. I think you've got an answer to a > very similar question already: > > http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=124206571628464 > extended_cpuid_level should be motivated, but probably does make sense. It hardly "completes" /proc/cpuinfo; especially if you consider that there are at least three additional ranges in wide use (two used by a single vendor only, and the third by virtualization software.) -hpa -- H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center I work for Intel. I don't speak on their behalf.