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 61838218845 for ; Mon, 8 Jun 2026 06:34:46 +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=1780900487; cv=none; b=J2ujPpERXorjlCwyZ2aqVR4GdMOT8VDt5E2C7f9q3OFPXS0n2CePZfheoYXZqNYpJalYsUaN6AwV4vhB0mxpROAR73978OushrZT83w2frSVSBMYfDo+FOSTuTKfQEyDYv6YOhOvSk7YFql8NJOKHccFsAOotwrSHLmiLSy4Xfg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1780900487; c=relaxed/simple; bh=CVpNgDlR1iqrZZeLrmqh3/tWy2NYW+zLujFcMAPB2qo=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=BklOgKegrAIi8G3sohbvp4KBDfGeLFLRd3RLi/MnZstuwDhAlU9GRnaXYkfIqyuNgQCKCYgh4CaC3YhhRRaJw/nt74HM8anPIaVYIcVCO3LH/C4uS4gtPvfEU81SHqfRoSTcw1jjoPl3646+Op7+i+O0hwyrIKsPpyqwepOU5Fo= 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=XUDhiDy5; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b=ZJZQBbYV; 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="XUDhiDy5"; dkim=permerror (0-bit key) header.d=linutronix.de header.i=@linutronix.de header.b="ZJZQBbYV" Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2026 08:34:36 +0200 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020; t=1780900479; 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=j+g8mO2/cXQMIjBxyMRUoQMHAD9iy3Sp8+zVN/wxSBA=; b=XUDhiDy5gAuyr8lkRz8w7xukcbgJXlL/Rr+C5ihHW3we07ThmKIxVmaFhvZM/RBy4sPi6d nQbXf5vEZb8U2KOqmKnioWcrgWpqbgZu5pK+Qic/0PtDQVhb5DeknUIZ646aP9upWZ222q qSdGv5ujpp4/kLarnBF/t/LwDBPiYJIDSUlTEZIN9JZOxp7IWECrpYEiGDC7b1lhwncR/G i69u2ek2Ri5oM7tNCjzvOgr2lHPeAdPNYEGVk0qliOfNCOJRnt0CSFZjbx0ziKfhBKKZUy 5wfQet59yCcxVT071KDcQrWltDQQ//TcSpaTnYzsDAmzPTkvpn88kDw7pu4E8Q== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=linutronix.de; s=2020e; t=1780900479; 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=j+g8mO2/cXQMIjBxyMRUoQMHAD9iy3Sp8+zVN/wxSBA=; b=ZJZQBbYVbYuC3suM6wIMcz/n1ZnuDB5mk+0G7DEqR5fCmz9SI9sEHPIKvghG3OOe0H8Sma 3h708FcSRJ4ZEDBw== From: "Ahmed S. Darwish" To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Maciej Wieczor-Retman , mingo@redhat.com, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, bp@alien8.de, hpa@zytor.com, tglx@kernel.org, sohil.mehta@intel.com, andrew.cooper3@citrix.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, john.ogness@linutronix.de, ludloff@gmail.com, maciej.wieczor-retman@intel.com, x86-cpuid@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] x86/cpuid: Update bitfields to x86-cpuid-db v3.1 Message-ID: References: <9653d8690ec7093c8190b12d1fa8c689c4da50fe.1780506200.git.m.wieczorretman@pm.me> 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: On Thu, 04 Jun 2026, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Maciej Wieczor-Retman wrote: > > > > Update leaf_types.h to version 3.1, as generated by x86-cpuid-db. > > > > The following detail from the first submission got lost: > > > @@ -246,7 +246,7 @@ struct leaf_0x6_0 { > > - thrd_director_nclasses : 8, // Number of classes, Intel thread director > > + hw_feedback_nclasses : 8, // Number of Intel Thread Director classes > > > > Note, for CPUID(0x6) thrd_director_nclasses, it was written this way > > because the project does not support bitfields names with more letters. > > What does this mean exactly, is there a string length limit on the > field name in 'struct leaf_0x6_0'? What is the limit? > Sorry, I should've made that more clear in the x86-cpuid-db release notes. Yes, there is a limit on field name lenghts so that the C headers formatted output is aligned and human readable. It's an implementation detail. After Maciej's patch: https://gitlab.com/x86-cpuid.org/x86-cpuid-db/-/commit/a7af01507814 I searched for more typos, grammatical mistakes, etc. and fixed some: https://gitlab.com/x86-cpuid.org/x86-cpuid-db/-/commit/41380ff73e60 Fixing thrd_director_nclasses name would exceed the project's field limit (23 characters), so I checked the manuals, and hw_feedback_nclasses was a better name anyway, and thus used it. That's the whole rationale. I guess this can be appened to the kernel patch changelog: Note, for CPUID(0x6) the "thrd_director_nclasses" field is replaced with "hw_feedback_nclasses" in this x86-cpuid-db release. Fixing the typo of the former would exceed the project's bitfield names chracter limit, and the latter name is more descriptive. See [link to x86-cpuid-db commit.] Thanks, Ahmed