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 S1757585AbcLAJDz (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Thu, 1 Dec 2016 04:03:55 -0500
Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([78.46.96.112]:46904 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1753677AbcLAJDt (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 1 Dec 2016 04:03:49 -0500
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2016 10:02:11 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@kernel.org>, x86@kernel.org,
        One Thousand Gnomes <gnomes@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com>,
        Matthew Whitehead <tedheadster@gmail.com>,
        Henrique de Moraes Holschuh <hmh@hmh.eng.br>,
        Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@redhat.com>,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@redhat.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] Revert "x86/boot: Fail the boot if !M486 and CPUID
 is missing"
Message-ID: <20161201090211.nrlyjt5uklcva3pd@pd.tnic>
References: <cover.1480536936.git.luto@kernel.org>
 <56690623af05784f41a4efbe1b25b1e2c43fdefb.1480536936.git.luto@kernel.org>
 <20161201055350.GH3092@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20161201055350.GH3092@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
User-Agent: NeoMutt/20161014 (1.7.1)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, Dec 01, 2016 at 06:53:50AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 12:34:53PM -0800, Andy Lutomirski wrote:
> > This reverts commit ed68d7e9b9cfb64f3045ffbcb108df03c09a0f98.
> > 
> > The patch wasn't quite correct -- there are non-Intel (and hence
> > non-486) CPUs that we support that don't have CPUID.  Since we no
> > longer require CPUID for sync_core(), just revert the patch.
>
> Might be useful to enumerate which special parts these are.

Right, and since we test for CPUID support at early boot, I think we
should use the X86_FEATURE_CPUID aspect from what I proposed earlier:

https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20161120111917.pw3alolx4fksfwbv@pd.tnic

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.