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 S1752729AbcJKOvb (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Tue, 11 Oct 2016 10:51:31 -0400
Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:25164 "EHLO mga11.intel.com"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1750770AbcJKOv3 (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Tue, 11 Oct 2016 10:51:29 -0400
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.31,329,1473145200"; 
   d="scan'208";a="18522940"
From: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
CC: "Yu, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        "Anvin, H Peter" <h.peter.anvin@intel.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>,
        "Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@intel.com>,
        Nilay Vaish <nilayvaish@gmail.com>, Shaohua Li <shli@fb.com>,
        David Carrillo-Cisneros <davidcc@google.com>,
        "Shankar, Ravi V" <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>,
        "Prakhya, Sai Praneeth" <sai.praneeth.prakhya@intel.com>,
        Vikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@linux.intel.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, x86 <x86@kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v3 07/18] x86/intel_rdt: Add Haswell feature discovery
Thread-Topic: [PATCH v3 07/18] x86/intel_rdt: Add Haswell feature discovery
Thread-Index: AQHSIPS+m0N0qyg8TkyIqCu/MmX7vaCgd4UAgABbvoD///R6gIABRimAgAGGPID//8bYgA==
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2016 14:51:28 +0000
Message-ID: <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F3A1F8DF9@ORSMSX114.amr.corp.intel.com>
References: <1475894763-64683-1-git-send-email-fenghua.yu@intel.com>
 <1475894763-64683-8-git-send-email-fenghua.yu@intel.com>
 <20161009114116.js3cevxzbuucjeni@pd.tnic>
 <20161009170936.GC7672@linux.intel.com>
 <20161009162822.dpi3foa2eqcnw635@pd.tnic> <20161010185545.GA8429@intel.com>
 <20161011111227.wpyvzdelxvod6e5h@pd.tnic>
In-Reply-To: <20161011111227.wpyvzdelxvod6e5h@pd.tnic>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
x-originating-ip: [10.22.254.138]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from base64 to 8bit by mail.home.local id u9BEpZhZ007991

> I wonder what's worse - comparing SKU strings - we know that from the MCE
> recovery experience - or poking at maybe nonexistent MSRs? :-)
>
> I guess the latter is cleaner so let's try it.

Vikas got beat up for comparing SKU strings, so the probe method
was offered as an alternative.  It's definitely more robust. E.g. my
list turns out to be incomplete, somehow I forgot to include:

    Intel(R) Xeon(R) processor E5-2658A v3

-Tony