historical-speck.lore.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: mark gross <mgross@linux.intel.com>
To: speck@linutronix.de
Subject: [MODERATED] Re: [PATCH 1/3] v4 more sampling fun 1
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2020 08:40:46 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200319154046.GB113006@mtg-dev.jf.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200319085040.GA3494118@kroah.com>

On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 09:50:40AM +0100, speck for Greg KH wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 05:56:27PM -0700, speck for mark gross wrote:
> > From: mark gross <mgross@linux.intel.com>
> > Subject: [PATCH 1/3] x86/cpu: Add stepping field to x86_cpu_id structure
> > 
> > Intel uses the same family/model for several CPUs. Sometimes
> > the stepping must be checked to tell them apart.
> > 
> > Note that to keep this patch simple the new field has been added at the
> > end to avoid churn with all the pre-C99 initialized uses of this
> > structure. Such legacy usage will result in a "0" value for the stepping
> > field, hence X86_STEPPING_ANY is defined as "0".
> 
> Are you sure about the "avoid churn" stuff?  Can't you just fix up the
> X86_FEATURE_MATCH() #define to do that?
I wasn't confident about avoiding churn but I was hoping too.
Yes, I am pretty sure I can fix up that macro.

> Also INTEL_CPU_FAM_ANY() already uses named identifiers, so you are ok
> with that usage.  How many other places is this "open coded" that would
> need to be fixed up.  Can't be more than 10-20, right?
git grep X86_FEATURE_MATCH |wc
    15      37    1110

Right.

> 
> > --- a/include/linux/mod_devicetable.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/mod_devicetable.h
> > @@ -665,6 +665,7 @@ struct x86_cpu_id {
> >  	__u16 model;
> >  	__u16 feature;	/* bit index */
> >  	kernel_ulong_t driver_data;
> > +	__u16 stepping;
> >  };
> 
> That just makes my eyes hurt, stepping really should be before
> driver_data.
Well, it wasnt' my first choice but, it did minimize wripple.

> 
> The macros should be fixed up anyway to use named identifiers, no time
> like the present :)
Works for me.

> 
> And this, and the cleanups, can be done in public, like I thought we
> asked for before, right?

Yes, I think you and Boris both and maybe a few others did.  I wanted to
pre-flight things here as much as possible given the design level changes I've
made to date on this.  Unless I get massive pushback on this version of the
patch set I think now is an ok time to push a patch to add steppings  along
with using named fields clean up on the public list.

Thank your for the feedback.  I will post a public version of this dependency
for the SRBDS mitigation control before my next patch post to the spec list.

--mark
> 
> thanks,
> 
> greg k-h

  reply	other threads:[~2020-03-19 15:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-03-18 21:27 [MODERATED] [PATCH 0/3] v4 more sampling fun 0 mark gross
2020-01-16 22:16 ` [MODERATED] [PATCH 2/3] v4 more sampling fun 2 mark gross
2020-01-30 19:12 ` [MODERATED] [PATCH 3/3] v4 more sampling fun 3 mark gross
2020-03-17  0:56 ` [MODERATED] [PATCH 1/3] v4 more sampling fun 1 mark gross
     [not found] ` <5e7296c7.1c69fb81.f9a2f.00ebSMTPIN_ADDED_BROKEN@mx.google.com>
2020-03-19  8:50   ` [MODERATED] " Greg KH
2020-03-19 15:40     ` mark gross [this message]
2020-03-19 15:50       ` Luck, Tony
2020-03-19 16:34         ` Greg KH
2020-03-19 18:13     ` Thomas Gleixner
2020-03-26  3:19 ` [MODERATED] Re: [PATCH 2/3] v4 more sampling fun 2 Josh Poimboeuf
2020-03-27 16:20   ` mark gross
2020-03-27 17:23     ` Luck, Tony
2020-03-27 19:12       ` mark gross
2020-03-27 17:37     ` Josh Poimboeuf
2020-03-27 19:27       ` mark gross
2020-03-26  3:25 ` [MODERATED] Re: [PATCH 3/3] v4 more sampling fun 3 Josh Poimboeuf
2020-03-27 16:28   ` mark gross

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20200319154046.GB113006@mtg-dev.jf.intel.com \
    --to=mgross@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=speck@linutronix.de \
    --subject='[MODERATED] Re: [PATCH 1/3] v4 more sampling fun 1' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).