All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>
Cc: Boris Petkov <bp@suse.de>,
	Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] Better memcpy_mcsafe()
Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2016 09:28:34 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160827072833.GA10883@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cover.1472244975.git.tony.luck@intel.com>


* Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com> wrote:

> The original version of this used a check of the x86_model_id string
> for the magic "Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E7-" to determine whether we are
> running on a cpu that supports machine check recovery.
> 
> Boris tried to talk me out of that, but at the time I didn't think
> there was a viable alternate option, and somehow he fell for that line.
> 
> It turns out there is a better way, that isn't as painful as I thought
> it might be.  It does help guarantee future employment, as I'll
> have to add a new quirk for each CPU generation. But the check for "E7"
> would have eventually failed and required a patch too.
> 
> The downside of a quirk is that it runs after the X86_FEATURE patching
> code. So instead of "static_cpu_has()" we use "static_branch_unlikely(&mcsafe_key)"

So why not move it to the early PCI quirk code in arch/x86/ and get rid of this 
quirk within a quirk?

Thanks,

	Ingo

      parent reply	other threads:[~2016-08-27  7:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <cover.1472244975.git.tony.luck@intel.com>
2016-08-27  5:21 ` [PATCH 0/4] Better memcpy_mcsafe() Borislav Petkov
     [not found] ` <dc51c61a114c713cb3eb645481f4bfd07a51408e.1472244975.git.tony.luck@intel.com>
2016-08-27  5:26   ` [PATCH 2/4] x86/mce, PCI: Provide quirks to identify Xeon models with machine check recovery Borislav Petkov
2016-08-27  5:36     ` Linus Torvalds
2016-08-30 18:53       ` [PATCH V2 " Luck, Tony
2016-09-01 12:38         ` Borislav Petkov
2016-09-01 16:34           ` Luck, Tony
2016-08-27  7:28 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]

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=20160827072833.GA10883@gmail.com \
    --to=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=bp@suse.de \
    --cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.