From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.alien8.de (mail.alien8.de [65.109.113.108]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CA17D62161 for ; Thu, 1 Feb 2024 15:07:43 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=65.109.113.108 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1706800066; cv=none; b=i4eyAzduNMHdxL30oXM10ykXXX63po33qWhi9ewfzbs0cGCq0nVeR9Igm9XxTWUGCYAf+aH2tBBU89WO+17qwdPDConSpox6ykI0hjRZulmFgFC2bIKU1u2uA/KRUEdZe+mfPrA8JtevqVARBLNBuiByNDFvoW5zfiYRzItKyd0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1706800066; c=relaxed/simple; bh=XBjclBTOSkTVxZ8Ts8UOn2p1Y4rHi0XFMqzczpYcWM4=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=GI3iz9s0X+WTc5mtiFfGJXhohpcqUxnU8YRzuLGKCcKcm6+Mgses60NEEPQlA/i0THI7Ltcjim/Qpq3v/KVTzT6hxXqIZqy+HWy+HQKT7CmokI5kjjbU8Swh/pPSSu8+32F2oqZ4BtfJZj7/Zsu9qYuDJ1oDlEgi7P0Ugqg/za0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=alien8.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=alien8.de; dkim=fail (4096-bit key) header.d=alien8.de header.i=@alien8.de header.b=hSnc92Qj reason="signature verification failed"; arc=none smtp.client-ip=65.109.113.108 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=alien8.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=alien8.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=fail reason="signature verification failed" (4096-bit key) header.d=alien8.de header.i=@alien8.de header.b="hSnc92Qj" Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail.alien8.de (SuperMail on ZX Spectrum 128k) with ESMTP id 6BA9940E01B0; Thu, 1 Feb 2024 15:07:41 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at mail.alien8.de Authentication-Results: mail.alien8.de (amavisd-new); dkim=fail (4096-bit key) reason="fail (body has been altered)" header.d=alien8.de Received: from mail.alien8.de ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.alien8.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id i2-zDSo717nE; Thu, 1 Feb 2024 15:07:39 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=alien8.de; s=alien8; t=1706800058; bh=d4iyIeD5VB3Lh3K5SmTuEl5mGkX/rk36fJBsXttyW+0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=hSnc92Qjdpopu51jhVHaXiKPgRHplRfPmeIEo34/HYtD7GFZVwMfJhNl1cy0XVnLN h96Jrh7B7MoNe1H3H6xmLTaDCe+MZl+ysJIxaDPew7KKqjTCHafwbBloR6Gyeb0te2 Lmg5/1jLWdtjtFE3qnSgR5egDtQnAfKxr9rWEkcRFhVMIUH/mX1rVCQXCIzVtnxAGH gQznCMspHpi3leCkIPfr7L2pcu4VU6sSCPL8gDG8C5JRVGM6HZLnEfAkIA3YvJm/iq u+ONZQDZkuJNbf5qqmfAHypEW3nGwlHJvJtstVhy9tPsMEzc+NKRUnTJpKLnhwEp3M HRUQDzU73PKO51zj4SQty2alSU8sdS4r/OcJuXj4blkrMS29YW6ylhv6tICoPgrKBj miOR/aRatUQGZH9ptaSbL7woE/s1kXT8ldvb7pHQKZe1htSeT5kEQbvJqtLChmXhbh HhaxHQ3nJS9i3EyYCWXLoUqmyk7xFkex8Xhk4jBeXg8knctU7yde4IBjEmhGrVQndH B8fgqFiDRdoG9ZBVnSLAJrFkr71YX9J0hXPUKp/SQeHXMUNer5+K36/NiIChovWAaz c2o4wyMiB0GQ45ShsDLmWcknrUXX3vnIrLEUtu7bH9c3o67lkEooDYBvVWojTRCDJf B/4pCcVbgqWlR+pyLI8D9ub8= Received: from zn.tnic (pd953033e.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [217.83.3.62]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail.alien8.de (SuperMail on ZX Spectrum 128k) with ESMTPSA id 3087C40E01A2; Thu, 1 Feb 2024 15:07:20 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2024 16:07:19 +0100 From: Borislav Petkov To: Thomas Gleixner Cc: LKML , x86@kernel.org, Tom Lendacky , Andrew Cooper , Arjan van de Ven , Huang Rui , Juergen Gross , Dimitri Sivanich , Sohil Mehta , K Prateek Nayak , Kan Liang , Zhang Rui , "Paul E. McKenney" , Feng Tang , Andy Shevchenko , Michael Kelley , "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" Subject: Re: [patch v5 07/19] x86/cpu: Use common topology code for Intel Message-ID: <20240201150719.GKZbuzp5_4Bi0kZ3t9@fat_crate.local> References: <20240117115752.863482697@linutronix.de> <20240117115908.740438007@linutronix.de> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20240117115908.740438007@linutronix.de> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 01:53:40PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > From: Thomas Gleixner >=20 > Intel CPUs use either topology leaf 0xb/0x1f evaluation or the legacy > SMP/HT evaluation based on CPUID leaf 0x1/0x4. >=20 > Move it over to the consolidated topology code and remove the random > topology hacks which are sprinkled into the Intel and the common code. >=20 > No functional change intended. >=20 > Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner > Tested-by: Juergen Gross > Tested-by: Sohil Mehta > Tested-by: Michael Kelley >=20 >=20 > --- > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c | 65 -------------------------= --------- > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/cpu.h | 4 -- > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c | 25 ------------- > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/topology_common.c | 5 ++ > 4 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 95 deletions(-) Right: arch/x86/kernel/cpu/topology.c:62:5: warning: no previous prototype for =E2= =80=98detect_extended_topology_early=E2=80=99 [-Wmissing-prototypes] 62 | int detect_extended_topology_early(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c) | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ That one is already unused after this one - might zap it here. --=20 Regards/Gruss, Boris. https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette