From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from galois.linutronix.de (Galois.linutronix.de [193.142.43.55]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 32507287263 for ; Thu, 29 Jan 2026 17:16:09 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769706970; cv=none; b=fh9lZCVVKRQkRJd81znau26seaTH18X//1KcNqMMmyP8psMmcBluSaiOvozI8CI6PNsT9bg+gVWv3plPrtVyD7j9MGbSb3PVI9BrvLsyva/GqSPPYhTvUDaxf2k5cRsoAgyco9GMJZ7tii7PUpM65lPfgx1vSGgCjZOVjauA4sA= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769706970; c=relaxed/simple; bh=O3acQOB10H+ccAZkd5nS2GKf2XGVJKAJLYd1KGeshwI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=RJtghWleDEYWgaQdeGtoXNNGb8iTkCbzSYfanjQjAnkDE1hjavzEwRbEgzBsYXSyJ/PAuknaI3LjuPyj8VLjdVYtT/IVh9l10k3WUtoaMH8qhK5WVCEGT8kJGgq2uFYV/mdgfi9zI2BvH4c5X3lWblQmPEy6QMwfCo36cMUxAhc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=cZttp0Ok; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=mB88WkRQ; arc=none smtp.client-ip=193.142.43.55 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linutronix.de Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="cZttp0Ok"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="mB88WkRQ" Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2026 18:16:04 +0100 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1769706967; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=O3acQOB10H+ccAZkd5nS2GKf2XGVJKAJLYd1KGeshwI=; b=cZttp0OkF3sC/sHIWyyAaHsO8pLJ0Lr+1eedhWxWEAFw2RbpiVX3hAzWCm6YNIPOEAj2Tk 5eD+5tMvl5tGWIn5nzBtJrNMJWjfrdZQ32XoTfDv16NxkFq6y3zjNpS4uOAIYT77hxrZyr Owrof8b9ilOND7weyfMCMSZ6o6leCXinUU1PMBByl47pXHhDJ5q8gEHvLF1ah3MLg0QQtO UwiqolJEAIM/Zw7Ithlm5fGJHHTQx9dZ3Z8t/ihm6y2iXRUXUmcucEzOCJKs6jO84Bmm/z CsfkYnhLU6wG4NJC9rwjrsf5DaIvyArciGRRDgPWBTpxndeCnLbRf7h8zwKZng== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1769706967; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=O3acQOB10H+ccAZkd5nS2GKf2XGVJKAJLYd1KGeshwI=; b=mB88WkRQi5AxHY+bav06FqIL/FdZw7e2TLekNEbdQNNK7WyOS+UINfrPewk+545Mph8n5R knLHgMeyh6Rh5mBw== From: "Ahmed S. Darwish" To: Borislav Petkov Cc: Ingo Molnar , Dave Hansen , Thomas Gleixner , Andrew Cooper , Sean Christopherson , David Woodhouse , "H. Peter Anvin" , Peter Zijlstra , Sohil Mehta , John Ogness , x86@kernel.org, x86-cpuid@lists.linux.dev, LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 07/35] x86: Introduce a centralized CPUID data model Message-ID: References: <20250905121515.192792-1-darwi@linutronix.de> <20250905121515.192792-8-darwi@linutronix.de> <20260116203117.GAaWqgFYTv1bHLxKV_@fat_crate.local> <20260129160709.GSaXuFreAkumbetUYJ@fat_crate.local> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: x86-cpuid@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20260129160709.GSaXuFreAkumbetUYJ@fat_crate.local> On Thu, 29 Jan 2026, Borislav Petkov wrote: > > But this is not about static and dynamic - you simply have different > subleaf layouts. And I guess you don't have to call them anything. You > simply have different struct types: leaf_0xd_0, leaf_0xd_1, leaf_0xd_n, > ... > > And that's fine. > > The point being: we want our definitions to be as close to the hw spec > definition as possible. Not invent new things. Just use what the SDM > says and that's it. > ACK.