From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Cc: X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/cpu: Start documenting what the X86_FEATURE_ flag testing macros do
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2022 10:42:15 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y2okdzF60XHLCK2v@zn.tnic> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <50b2113d-d6a8-ab36-028d-b78c41142c18@intel.com>
On Mon, Nov 07, 2022 at 02:13:52PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote:
> It seems to be mildly warning against using _static_cpu_has()
> indiscriminately. Should we tone that down a bit if we're recommending
> implicit use of static_cpu_has() via cpu_feature_enabled() everywhere?
Yeah, that comment is mine AFAIR. I was thinking of simply removing
it as part of a long-term effort of converting everything to
cpu_feature_enabled() and hiding static_cpu_has() eventually...
> I was also thinking that some longer-form stuff in Documentation/ might
> be a good idea, along with some examples. I'd be happy to follow this
> up with another patch that added Documentation/ like:
The problem with this is, it'll go out of sync with the code. So how
about we make this a kernel-doc thing so that it gets updated in
parallel?
Also look at Documentation/x86/cpuinfo.rst
It basically has most of what you wanna add.
:-)
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-11-08 9:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-11-07 21:15 [PATCH] x86/cpu: Start documenting what the X86_FEATURE_ flag testing macros do Borislav Petkov
2022-11-07 22:13 ` Dave Hansen
2022-11-08 9:42 ` Borislav Petkov [this message]
2022-11-10 23:27 ` Sean Christopherson
2023-01-19 9:47 ` Borislav Petkov
2023-01-20 0:35 ` Sean Christopherson
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=Y2okdzF60XHLCK2v@zn.tnic \
--to=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--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).