Re: [RFC PATCH 08/15] x86/cpu/intel: Replace early family 6 checks with VFM ones

[David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>]

On Fri, 20 Dec 2024 21:37:03 +0000
Sohil Mehta <sohil.mehta@intel.com> wrote:

> Introduce names for some old pentium models and replace with VFM based
> checks.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sohil Mehta <sohil.mehta@intel.com>
> ---
>  arch/x86/include/asm/intel-family.h |  3 +++
>  arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c         | 13 ++++++-------
>  2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/intel-family.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/intel-family.h
> index 6d7b04ffc5fd..41278093bcd4 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/intel-family.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/intel-family.h
> @@ -46,6 +46,9 @@
>  #define INTEL_ANY			IFM(X86_FAMILY_ANY, X86_MODEL_ANY)
>  
>  #define INTEL_PENTIUM_PRO		IFM(6, 0x01)
> +#define INTEL_PENTIUM_II_KLAMATH	IFM(6, 0x03)
> +#define INTEL_PENTIUM_III_TUALATIN	IFM(6, 0x0B)
> +#define INTEL_PENTIUM_M_DOTHAN		IFM(6, 0x0D)
>  
>  #define INTEL_CORE_YONAH		IFM(6, 0x0E)

I think I'd add all the extra defines in one patch.

Isn't the order 'funny' as well.
I think it ends up being neither numeric or date order.
Increasing family order is probably best, but the headings for each
'family' probably need to be a bit more descriptive (esp 15 - all P4
netburst).

	David