From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Oct 2021 12:40:18 -0700
Subject: [PATCH v2 01/15] x86/cpu: Move intel-family to arch-independent
 headers
In-Reply-To: <58ef4107e9b2c60a2605aac0d2fb6670a95bc9e0.camel@intel.com>
References: <20210803113134.2262882-1-iwona.winiarska@intel.com>
 <20210803113134.2262882-2-iwona.winiarska@intel.com>
 <YVtQG+idmwKn0qLe@zn.tnic>
 <58ef4107e9b2c60a2605aac0d2fb6670a95bc9e0.camel@intel.com>
Message-ID: <67f2cfda-c78b-6282-f5a3-2f345f8e2849@intel.com>
List-Id: <linux-aspeed.lists.ozlabs.org>
To: linux-aspeed@lists.ozlabs.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 10/11/21 12:21 PM, Winiarska, Iwona wrote:
> On Mon, 2021-10-04 at 21:03 +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>> On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 01:31:20PM +0200, Iwona Winiarska wrote:
>>> Baseboard management controllers (BMC) often run Linux but are usually
>>> implemented with non-X86 processors. They can use PECI to access package
>>> config space (PCS) registers on the host CPU and since some information,
>>> e.g. figuring out the core count, can be obtained using different
>>> registers on different CPU generations, they need to decode the family
>>> and model.
>>>
>>> Move the data from arch/x86/include/asm/intel-family.h into a new file
>>> include/linux/x86/intel-family.h so that it can be used by other
>>> architectures.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Iwona Winiarska <iwona.winiarska@intel.com>
>>> Reviewed-by: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>
>>> Reviewed-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@intel.com>
>>> ---
>>> To limit tree-wide changes and help people that were expecting
>>> intel-family defines in arch/x86 to find it more easily without going
>>> through git history, we're not removing the original header
>>> completely, we're keeping it as a "stub" that includes the new one.
>>> If there is a consensus that the tree-wide option is better,
>>> we can choose this approach.
>> Why can't the linux/ namespace header include the x86 one so that
>> nothing changes for arch/x86/?
> Same reason why PECI can't just include arch/x86 directly (we're building for
> ARM, not x86).
If you're in include/linux/x86-hacks.h, what prevents you from doing

#include "../../arch/x86/include/asm/intel-family.h"

?

In the end, to the compiler, it's just a file in a weird location in the
tree.  I think I'd prefer one weird include to moving that file out of
arch/x86.