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 S1754052AbcJKQ7k (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Tue, 11 Oct 2016 12:59:40 -0400
Received: from mail-it0-f65.google.com ([209.85.214.65]:34847 "EHLO
        mail-it0-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1753169AbcJKQ7h (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Tue, 11 Oct 2016 12:59:37 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20161008195250.zaixshuwfas4y27c@pd.tnic>
References: <1475894763-64683-1-git-send-email-fenghua.yu@intel.com>
 <1475894763-64683-5-git-send-email-fenghua.yu@intel.com> <CACbG309kJa-6pAB_7K4GaJEPB7Tw0fQxd=_5+oWtZm1kCaAtHA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20161008205454.GB7672@linux.intel.com> <20161008195250.zaixshuwfas4y27c@pd.tnic>
From: Nilay Vaish <nilayvaish@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2016 11:57:52 -0500
Message-ID: <CACbG30_1BwWx3kq+V5TS6Rr+_UC08aYVRJARhBdayn6KFhBcBA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 04/18] x86/intel_rdt: Feature discovery
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
Cc: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <h.peter.anvin@intel.com>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>, Shaohua Li <shli@fb.com>,
        David Carrillo-Cisneros <davidcc@google.com>,
        Ravi V Shankar <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>,
        Sai Prakhya <sai.praneeth.prakhya@intel.com>,
        Vikas Shivappa <vikas.shivappa@linux.intel.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, x86 <x86@kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 8 October 2016 at 14:52, Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 08, 2016 at 01:54:54PM -0700, Fenghua Yu wrote:
>> > I think these #defines are specific to Intel.  I would prefer if we
>> > have _INTEL_ somewhere in them.
>
> We don't generally add vendor names to those defines. Even more so if
> the 0x0... leaf range is Intel-specific anyway.
>
>> Is adding "Intel" in comment good?
>
> I don't see any need if the leaf has already this heading:
>
> /* Intel-defined CPU features, CPUID level 0x00000007:0 (ebx), word 9 */
>

I think we should go with Fenghua' suggestion on this.  Reading the
code around the edits from this patch, it seems word 7 is not owned by
anyone.  Both AMD and Intel seem to be using it.

--
Nilay