All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, H Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>,
	Christopherson Sean J <sean.j.christopherson@intel.com>,
	Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>,
	Radim Krcmar <rkrcmar@redhat.com>,
	Ravi V Shankar <ravi.v.shankar@intel.com>,
	linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, x86 <x86@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] x86/cpufeatures: Combine word 11 and 12 into new scattered features word 11
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2019 14:24:45 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190619212445.GA234387@romley-ivt3.sc.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190619173628.GI9574@zn.tnic>

On Wed, Jun 19, 2019 at 07:36:28PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 11:00:15AM -0700, Fenghua Yu wrote:
> > @@ -832,33 +857,6 @@ void get_cpu_cap(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
> >  		c->x86_capability[CPUID_D_1_EAX] = eax;
> > -	/* Additional Intel-defined flags: level 0x0000000F */
> > -	if (c->cpuid_level >= 0x0000000F) {
> What I meant with having a separate patch doing the carve out is to have
> a single patch doing *only* code movement - no changes, no nothing. So
> that it is clear what happens. Intermixing code movement and changes is
> a bad idea and hard to review.
> 
> IOW, I did this:
> 
> ---
> From cef4f58a3da0465bbff33b2d669cc600b775f3ba Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
> Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2019 17:24:34 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH] x86/cpufeatures: Carve out CQM features retrieval
> 
> ... into a separate function for better readability. Split out from a
> patch from Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com> to keep the mechanical,
> sole code movement separate for easy review.
> 
> No functional changes.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov <bp@suse.de>
> Cc: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
> Cc: x86@kernel.org
> ---
>  arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c | 60 ++++++++++++++++++++----------------
>  1 file changed, 33 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c
> index 2c57fffebf9b..fe6ed9696467 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/common.c
> @@ -801,6 +801,38 @@ static void init_speculation_control(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
>  	}
>  }
>  
> +static void init_cqm(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
> +{
> +	u32 eax, ebx, ecx, edx;
> 
> This way you have *pure* code movement only.
> 
> And then your second patch turns into this, which shows *exactly* what
> has been changed in init_cqm().

Yes, the added patch makes this patch set more clear and readable.

> 
> Please have a look and send me only the now third patch with corrected
> commit message.
> 
> From e33527b8cde8bef84cdc90651d1a1c7a9a5234d7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
> Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2019 18:51:09 +0200
> Subject: [PATCH] x86/cpufeatures: Combine word 11 and 12 into a new
>  scattered features word
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
> 
> It's a waste for the four X86_FEATURE_CQM_* feature bits to occupy two
> whole feature bits words. To better utilize feature words, re-define
> word 11 to host scattered features and move the four X86_FEATURE_CQM_*
> features into Linux defined word 11. More scattered features can be
> added in word 11 in the future.

I checked and tested the updated patch set (now three patches). They
look much better than v2.

I will send you the now third patch with corrected commit message
in the other email thread.

Thanks.

-Fenghua

  reply	other threads:[~2019-06-19 21:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-06-17 18:00 [PATCH v2 0/2] x86/cpufeatures: Re-arrange a few features and enumerate AVX512 BFLOAT16 intructions Fenghua Yu
2019-06-17 18:00 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] x86/cpufeatures: Combine word 11 and 12 into new scattered features word 11 Fenghua Yu
2019-06-19 17:36   ` Borislav Petkov
2019-06-19 21:24     ` Fenghua Yu [this message]
2019-06-20 11:37   ` [tip:x86/cpu] x86/cpufeatures: Combine word 11 and 12 into a new scattered features word tip-bot for Fenghua Yu
2019-06-17 18:00 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] x86/cpufeatures: Enumerate new AVX512 BFLOAT16 instructions Fenghua Yu
2019-06-19 17:31   ` Borislav Petkov
2019-06-19 21:34     ` Fenghua Yu
2019-06-20 10:37       ` Borislav Petkov
2019-06-20 14:06         ` Fenghua Yu
2019-06-20 11:38   ` [tip:x86/cpu] x86/cpufeatures: Enumerate the " tip-bot for Fenghua Yu

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=20190619212445.GA234387@romley-ivt3.sc.intel.com \
    --to=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
    --cc=bp@alien8.de \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=pbonzini@redhat.com \
    --cc=ravi.v.shankar@intel.com \
    --cc=rkrcmar@redhat.com \
    --cc=sean.j.christopherson@intel.com \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --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 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.