From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
x86@kernel.org, Tom Lendacky <thomas.lendacky@amd.com>,
Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@citrix.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>,
Huang Rui <ray.huang@amd.com>, Juergen Gross <jgross@suse.com>,
Dimitri Sivanich <dimitri.sivanich@hpe.com>,
Sohil Mehta <sohil.mehta@intel.com>,
K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@amd.com>,
Kan Liang <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>,
Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@kernel.org>,
Feng Tang <feng.tang@intel.com>,
Andy Shevchenko <andy@infradead.org>,
Michael Kelley <mhklinux@outlook.com>,
"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [patch v5 06/19] x86/cpu: Provide a sane leaf 0xb/0x1f parser
Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2024 15:17:45 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87il2tlqba.ffs@tglx> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240130193102.GEZblOdor_bzoVhT0f@fat_crate.local>
On Tue, Jan 30 2024 at 20:31, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 23, 2024 at 01:53:39PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> +static inline bool topo_subleaf(struct topo_scan *tscan, u32 leaf, u32 subleaf,
>
> "parse_topo_subleaf"?
>
> With a verb in the name...
>
>> + unsigned int *last_dom)
>> +{
>> + unsigned int dom, maxtype;
>> + const unsigned int *map;
>> + struct {
>> + // eax
>
> Can we please not use those yucky // comments together with the
> multiline ones?
TBH, the // comment style is really better for struct definitions. It's
denser and easier to parse.
// eax
u32 x2apic_shift : 5, // Number of bits to shift APIC ID right
// for the topology ID at the next level
: 27; // Reserved
// ebx
u32 num_processors : 16, // Number of processors at current level
: 16; // Reserved
versus:
/* eax */
u32 x2apic_shift : 5, /*
* Number of bits to shift APIC ID right
* for the topology ID at the next level
*/
: 27; /* Reserved */
/* ebx */
u32 num_processors : 16, /* Number of processors at current level */
: 16; /* Reserved */
Especially x2apic_shift is horrible and the comments of EBX are visually
impaired while with the C++ comments x2apic_shift looks natural and the
EBX comments are just open to the right and therefore simpler.
>> + if (!tscan->dom_shifts[TOPO_SMT_DOMAIN] && tscan->dom_ncpus[TOPO_SMT_DOMAIN] > 1) {
>> + unsigned int sft = get_count_order(tscan->dom_ncpus[TOPO_SMT_DOMAIN]);
>> +
>> + pr_warn_once(FW_BUG "CPUID leaf 0x%x subleaf 0 has shift level 0 but %u CPUs\n",
>> + leaf, tscan->dom_ncpus[TOPO_SMT_DOMAIN]);
>
> Do you really wanna warn about that? Hoping that someone would do
> something about it while there's time...?
If it's caught in early testing, this should be fixed, no?
Thanks,
tglx
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-02-12 14:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-01-23 12:53 [patch v5 00/19] x86/cpu: Rework topology evaluation Thomas Gleixner
2024-01-23 12:53 ` [patch v5 01/19] x86/cpu: Provide cpuid_read() et al Thomas Gleixner
2024-01-24 12:25 ` Borislav Petkov
2024-01-24 20:02 ` Borislav Petkov
2024-02-12 13:57 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-01-23 12:53 ` [patch v5 02/19] x86/cpu: Provide cpu_init/parse_topology() Thomas Gleixner
2024-02-01 22:16 ` Sohil Mehta
2024-01-23 12:53 ` [patch v5 03/19] x86/cpu: Add legacy topology parser Thomas Gleixner
2024-01-24 20:12 ` Borislav Petkov
2024-01-23 12:53 ` [patch v5 04/19] x86/cpu: Use common topology code for Centaur and Zhaoxin Thomas Gleixner
2024-01-30 19:09 ` Borislav Petkov
2024-01-23 12:53 ` [patch v5 05/19] x86/cpu: Move __max_die_per_package to common.c Thomas Gleixner
2024-01-23 12:53 ` [patch v5 06/19] x86/cpu: Provide a sane leaf 0xb/0x1f parser Thomas Gleixner
2024-01-30 19:31 ` Borislav Petkov
2024-02-12 14:17 ` Thomas Gleixner [this message]
2024-02-12 15:00 ` Borislav Petkov
2024-02-12 15:08 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-02-12 15:43 ` Borislav Petkov
2024-02-12 23:02 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-02-12 15:03 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-02-12 15:05 ` Borislav Petkov
2024-02-13 14:30 ` [tip: x86/misc] Documentation/maintainer-tip: Add C++ tail comments exception tip-bot2 for Borislav Petkov (AMD)
2024-01-23 12:53 ` [patch v5 07/19] x86/cpu: Use common topology code for Intel Thomas Gleixner
2024-02-01 15:07 ` Borislav Petkov
2024-01-23 12:53 ` [patch v5 08/19] x86/cpu/amd: Provide a separate accessor for Node ID Thomas Gleixner
2024-02-01 15:19 ` Borislav Petkov
2024-01-23 12:53 ` [patch v5 09/19] x86/cpu: Provide an AMD/HYGON specific topology parser Thomas Gleixner
2024-02-01 15:55 ` Borislav Petkov
2024-02-02 12:30 ` Borislav Petkov
2024-01-23 12:53 ` [patch v5 10/19] x86/smpboot: Teach it about topo.amd_node_id Thomas Gleixner
2024-02-06 15:48 ` Borislav Petkov
2024-01-23 12:53 ` [patch v5 11/19] x86/cpu: Use common topology code for AMD Thomas Gleixner
2024-02-06 15:58 ` Borislav Petkov
2024-02-12 14:50 ` Thomas Gleixner
2024-02-12 15:06 ` Borislav Petkov
2024-01-23 12:53 ` [patch v5 12/19] x86/cpu: Use common topology code for HYGON Thomas Gleixner
2024-01-23 12:53 ` [patch v5 13/19] x86/mm/numa: Use core domain size on AMD Thomas Gleixner
2024-02-12 15:56 ` Borislav Petkov
2024-01-23 12:53 ` [patch v5 14/19] x86/cpu: Make topology_amd_node_id() use the actual node info Thomas Gleixner
2024-01-23 12:53 ` [patch v5 15/19] x86/cpu: Remove topology.c Thomas Gleixner
2024-01-23 12:53 ` [patch v5 16/19] x86/cpu: Remove x86_coreid_bits Thomas Gleixner
2024-01-23 12:53 ` [patch v5 17/19] x86/apic: Remove unused phys_pkg_id() callback Thomas Gleixner
2024-01-23 12:53 ` [patch v5 18/19] x86/xen/smp_pv: Remove cpudata fiddling Thomas Gleixner
2024-01-23 12:53 ` [patch v5 19/19] x86/apic/uv: Remove the private leaf 0xb parser Thomas Gleixner
2024-01-31 7:40 ` [patch v5 00/19] x86/cpu: Rework topology evaluation Zhang, Rui
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=87il2tlqba.ffs@tglx \
--to=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=andrew.cooper3@citrix.com \
--cc=andy@infradead.org \
--cc=arjan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dimitri.sivanich@hpe.com \
--cc=feng.tang@intel.com \
--cc=jgross@suse.com \
--cc=kan.liang@linux.intel.com \
--cc=kprateek.nayak@amd.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mhklinux@outlook.com \
--cc=paulmck@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=ray.huang@amd.com \
--cc=rui.zhang@intel.com \
--cc=sohil.mehta@intel.com \
--cc=thomas.lendacky@amd.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).