From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753386AbcKHKaQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Nov 2016 05:30:16 -0500 Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([78.46.96.112]:43286 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932223AbcKHKaL (ORCPT ); Tue, 8 Nov 2016 05:30:11 -0500 Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2016 11:30:08 +0100 From: Borislav Petkov To: He Chen Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, Paolo Bonzini , Radim =?utf-8?B?S3LEjW3DocWZ?= , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H . Peter Anvin" , Luwei Kang , Piotr Luc Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/2] cpuid: Add a helper in scattered.c to return cpuid leaf info Message-ID: <20161108103008.drrg2dovlxkvs7du@pd.tnic> References: <1478595148-4462-1-git-send-email-he.chen@linux.intel.com> <1478595148-4462-2-git-send-email-he.chen@linux.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1478595148-4462-2-git-send-email-he.chen@linux.intel.com> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20161014 (1.7.1) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Nov 08, 2016 at 04:52:27PM +0800, He Chen wrote: > Some sparse cpuid leafs are gathered in a fake leaf to save size of s/cpuid/CPUID/ > x86_capability array in current code, but sometimes, kernel or other > modules (e.g. KVM cpuid enumeration) may need actual hardware leaf > information. > > This patch adds a helper get_scattered_cpuid_leaf to rebuild actual get_scattered_cpuid_leaf() > cpuid leaf, and it can be called outside by modules. s/cpuid/CPUID/ > Also, export > enum cpuid_regs in pt.c and scattered.c to enum cpuid_regs_idx in > processor.h. No need for that last sentence - it is obvious when looking at the diff itself. > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h > index 984a7bf..e7f8c62 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h > @@ -137,6 +137,17 @@ struct cpuinfo_x86 { > u32 microcode; > }; > > +struct cpuid_regs { > + u32 eax, ebx, ecx, edx; > +}; Why do you export this? It is used in cpuid.c only. > +enum cpuid_regs_idx { > + CPUID_EAX = 0, > + CPUID_EBX, > + CPUID_ECX, > + CPUID_EDX, > +}; > + > #define X86_VENDOR_INTEL 0 > #define X86_VENDOR_CYRIX 1 > #define X86_VENDOR_AMD 2 > @@ -178,6 +189,9 @@ extern void identify_secondary_cpu(struct cpuinfo_x86 *); > extern void print_cpu_info(struct cpuinfo_x86 *); > void print_cpu_msr(struct cpuinfo_x86 *); > extern void init_scattered_cpuid_features(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c); > +extern u32 get_scattered_cpuid_leaf(unsigned int level, > + unsigned int sub_leaf, > + enum cpuid_regs_idx reg); > extern unsigned int init_intel_cacheinfo(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c); > extern void init_amd_cacheinfo(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c); > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/scattered.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/scattered.c > index 1db8dc4..ef131ea 100644 > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/scattered.c > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/scattered.c > @@ -17,11 +17,17 @@ struct cpuid_bit { > u32 sub_leaf; > }; > > -enum cpuid_regs { > - CR_EAX = 0, > - CR_ECX, > - CR_EDX, > - CR_EBX > +/* Please keep the leaf sorted by cpuid_bit.level for faster search. */ > +static const struct cpuid_bit cpuid_bits[] = { > + { X86_FEATURE_APERFMPERF, CPUID_ECX, 0, 0x00000006, 0 }, > + { X86_FEATURE_EPB, CPUID_ECX, 3, 0x00000006, 0 }, > + { X86_FEATURE_INTEL_PT, CPUID_EBX, 25, 0x00000007, 0 }, > + { X86_FEATURE_AVX512_4VNNIW, CPUID_EDX, 2, 0x00000007, 0 }, > + { X86_FEATURE_AVX512_4FMAPS, CPUID_EDX, 3, 0x00000007, 0 }, > + { X86_FEATURE_HW_PSTATE, CPUID_EDX, 7, 0x80000007, 0 }, > + { X86_FEATURE_CPB, CPUID_EDX, 9, 0x80000007, 0 }, > + { X86_FEATURE_PROC_FEEDBACK, CPUID_EDX, 11, 0x80000007, 0 }, > + { 0, 0, 0, 0, 0 } > }; > > void init_scattered_cpuid_features(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c) > @@ -30,18 +36,6 @@ void init_scattered_cpuid_features(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c) > u32 regs[4]; > const struct cpuid_bit *cb; > > - static const struct cpuid_bit cpuid_bits[] = { > - { X86_FEATURE_INTEL_PT, CR_EBX,25, 0x00000007, 0 }, > - { X86_FEATURE_AVX512_4VNNIW, CR_EDX, 2, 0x00000007, 0 }, > - { X86_FEATURE_AVX512_4FMAPS, CR_EDX, 3, 0x00000007, 0 }, > - { X86_FEATURE_APERFMPERF, CR_ECX, 0, 0x00000006, 0 }, > - { X86_FEATURE_EPB, CR_ECX, 3, 0x00000006, 0 }, > - { X86_FEATURE_HW_PSTATE, CR_EDX, 7, 0x80000007, 0 }, > - { X86_FEATURE_CPB, CR_EDX, 9, 0x80000007, 0 }, > - { X86_FEATURE_PROC_FEEDBACK, CR_EDX,11, 0x80000007, 0 }, > - { 0, 0, 0, 0, 0 } > - }; > - > for (cb = cpuid_bits; cb->feature; cb++) { > > /* Verify that the level is valid */ @tip guys: this will conflict with the CAT changes. I've resolved it this way by keeping the cpuid_bit.level sorted. @@ -17,11 +17,20 @@ struct cpuid_bit { u32 sub_leaf; }; -enum cpuid_regs { - CR_EAX = 0, - CR_ECX, - CR_EDX, - CR_EBX +/* Please keep the leaf sorted by cpuid_bit.level for faster search. */ +static const struct cpuid_bit cpuid_bits[] = { + { X86_FEATURE_APERFMPERF, CPUID_ECX, 0, 0x00000006, 0 }, + { X86_FEATURE_EPB, CPUID_ECX, 3, 0x00000006, 0 }, + { X86_FEATURE_INTEL_PT, CPUID_EBX, 25, 0x00000007, 0 }, + { X86_FEATURE_AVX512_4VNNIW, CPUID_EDX, 2, 0x00000007, 0 }, + { X86_FEATURE_AVX512_4FMAPS, CPUID_EDX, 3, 0x00000007, 0 }, + { X86_FEATURE_CAT_L3, CPUID_EBX, 1, 0x00000010, 0 }, + { X86_FEATURE_CAT_L2, CPUID_EBX, 2, 0x00000010, 0 }, + { X86_FEATURE_CDP_L3, CPUID_ECX, 2, 0x00000010, 1 }, + { X86_FEATURE_HW_PSTATE, CPUID_EDX, 7, 0x80000007, 0 }, + { X86_FEATURE_CPB, CPUID_EDX, 9, 0x80000007, 0 }, + { X86_FEATURE_PROC_FEEDBACK, CPUID_EDX, 11, 0x80000007, 0 }, + { 0, 0, 0, 0, 0 } }; void init_scattered_cpuid_features(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c) -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.