From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1765340AbdAJQlA convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Tue, 10 Jan 2017 11:41:00 -0500
Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:35070 "EHLO mail.zytor.com"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1764136AbdAJQkz (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Tue, 10 Jan 2017 11:40:55 -0500
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 08:40:39 -0800
User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android
In-Reply-To: <20170110090415.46htye4aczidzvh2@pd.tnic>
References: <20170109114147.5082-2-bp@alien8.de> <tip-5dedade6dfa243c130b85d1e4daba6f027805033@git.kernel.org> <9724A6CA-1F64-4B4D-BAE4-4116FCE7838D@zytor.com> <20170110090415.46htye4aczidzvh2@pd.tnic>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT
Subject: Re: [tip:x86/urgent] x86/CPU: Add native CPUID variants returning a single datum
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
CC: linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org,
        tip-bot for Borislav Petkov <tipbot@zytor.com>, mingo@kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de
From: hpa@zytor.com
Message-ID: <691CAE2B-2FDC-44CA-8731-D70C91E94320@zytor.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On January 10, 2017 1:04:15 AM PST, Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> wrote:
>On Mon, Jan 09, 2017 at 04:19:29PM -0800, hpa@zytor.com wrote:
>> Any reason to not make these interfaces (leaf, subleaf) from the
>start?
>
>Two, actually:
>
>1. I modelled them after the cpuid_<reg>(op) versions

You are introducing a new API; makes more sense to do it right from the start.  The only reason not to have a subleaf for the non-native variants is that they may decay into a function call so there is an extra cost.

>2. I don't think we need the subleaf variant right now.

But at some point we will.  Just consider leaf 7.

>But, when we do, we can do that when we cross that bridge and add
>
>native_cpuid_<reg>(leaf, subleaf)
>
>which gets called by the native_cpuid_<reg>(leaf) variants.

C doesn't allow function name overloading ;) (Well, except the C11 type hacks; to the best of my knowledge that doesn't in any way support argument *count* overloading.)

This means that the naming will be awkward at best.


-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.