From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Sohil Mehta <sohil.mehta@intel.com>
Cc: x86@kernel.org, Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com>,
Sandipan Das <sandipan.das@amd.com>,
Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@oracle.com>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com>,
Nikolay Borisov <nik.borisov@suse.com>,
Eric Biggers <ebiggers@google.com>, Xin Li <xin3.li@intel.com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@intel.com>,
Kirill Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] x86/cpufeature: Add feature dependency checks
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2025 19:46:16 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z8Cy-IonwmCGNkkQ@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241210224037.3052555-1-sohil.mehta@intel.com>
* Sohil Mehta <sohil.mehta@intel.com> wrote:
> +
> +/*
> + * Return the feature "name" if available otherwise return
> + * the X86_FEATURE_* numerals to make it easier to identify
> + * the feature.
> + */
> +static const char *x86_feature_name(unsigned int feature, char *buf)
> +{
> + if (x86_cap_flags[feature])
> + return x86_cap_flags[feature];
> +
> + snprintf(buf, 16, "%d*32+%2d", feature / 32, feature % 32);
> +
> + return buf;
> +}
> +
> +void filter_feature_dependencies(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
> +{
> + char feature_buf[16], depends_buf[16];
> + const struct cpuid_dep *d;
> +
> + for (d = cpuid_deps; d->feature; d++) {
> + if (cpu_has(c, d->feature) && !cpu_has(c, d->depends)) {
> + pr_info("CPU%d: Disabling feature %s due to missing feature %s\n",
> + smp_processor_id(),
> + x86_feature_name(d->feature, feature_buf),
> + x86_feature_name(d->depends, depends_buf));
> + do_clear_cpu_cap(c, d->feature);
> + }
> + }
So let's not disable any CPU features actively for the time being, how
about issuing a pr_warn() only about the dependency violation?
I think the main problem is when these problems slip through 100%
unnoticed.
Thanks,
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-27 18:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-12-10 22:40 [PATCH v4] x86/cpufeature: Add feature dependency checks Sohil Mehta
2025-02-27 18:46 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2025-02-27 20:14 ` Sohil Mehta
2025-02-27 20:17 ` Ingo Molnar
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=Z8Cy-IonwmCGNkkQ@gmail.com \
--to=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@intel.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=dave.hansen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=ebiggers@google.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=nik.borisov@suse.com \
--cc=pawan.kumar.gupta@linux.intel.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=sandipan.das@amd.com \
--cc=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=sohil.mehta@intel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=ubizjak@gmail.com \
--cc=vegard.nossum@oracle.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
--cc=xin3.li@intel.com \
/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.