From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S1763106AbZD1R2w@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1763106AbZD1R2w (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 28 Apr 2009 13:28:52 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753250AbZD1R2j
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Tue, 28 Apr 2009 13:28:39 -0400
Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:36833 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1755861AbZD1R2h (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 28 Apr 2009 13:28:37 -0400
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 19:28:28 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Jaswinder Singh Rajput <jaswinder@kernel.org>
Cc: x86 maintainers <x86@kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
       Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [git-pull -tip] x86: cpu_debug patches
Message-ID: <20090428172828.GA15392@elte.hu>
References: <1240190145.3106.90.camel@ht.satnam> <1240191359.3106.93.camel@ht.satnam> <1240217428.3083.2.camel@ht.satnam> <20090420111619.GE6670@elte.hu> <1240933437.3074.4.camel@ht.satnam>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1240933437.3074.4.camel@ht.satnam>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean
X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5
X-ELTE-SpamLevel: 
X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no
X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 
X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.5
	-1.5 BAYES_00               BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1%
	[score: 0.0000]
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org


* Jaswinder Singh Rajput <jaswinder@kernel.org> wrote:

> @@ -850,10 +903,10 @@ static int cpu_init_cpu(void)
>  		cpui = &cpu_data(cpu);
>  		if (!cpu_has(cpui, X86_FEATURE_MSR))
>  			continue;
> -		per_cpu(cpu_model, cpu) = ((cpui->x86_vendor << 16) |
> -					   (cpui->x86 << 8) |
> -					   (cpui->x86_model));
> -		per_cpu(cpu_modelflag, cpu) = get_cpu_modelflag(cpu);
> +		per_cpu(cpu_modelflag, cpu) = get_cpu_flag(cpui);
> +		if (!per_cpu(cpu_modelflag, cpu))
> +			send_report(per_cpu(cpu_priv_count, cpu), cpui);

This means that if the CPU is not enumerated in the model table 
explicitly, we'll fall back to some really minimal output, right?

	Ingo