From: Eric Biggers <ebiggers@kernel.org>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org,
x86@kernel.org, linux-block@vger.kernel.org,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>, Keith Busch <kbusch@kernel.org>,
Kent Overstreet <kent.overstreet@linux.dev>,
"Martin K . Petersen" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/6] x86: move ZMM exclusion list into CPU feature flag
Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2025 13:37:05 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250210213705.GD348261@sol.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250210211710.GCZ6ps1pNklAXyqD0p@fat_crate.local>
On Mon, Feb 10, 2025 at 10:17:10PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 10, 2025 at 01:01:03PM -0800, Eric Biggers wrote:
> > I see that cpu_feature_enabled() uses code patching while boot_cpu_has() does
> > not. All these checks occur once at module load time, though, so code patching
> > wouldn't be beneficial.
>
> We want to convert all code to use a single interface for testing CPU features
> - cpu_feature_enabled() - and the implementation shouldn't be important to
> users - it should just work.
>
> Since you're adding new code, you might as well use the proper interface. As
> to converting crypto/ and the rest of the tree, that should happen at some
> point... eventually...
Well, it's new code in a function that already has a bunch of boot_cpu_has()
checks. I don't really like leaving around random inconsistencies. If there is
a new way to do it, we should just update it everywhere.
I'll also note that boot_cpu_has() is missing a comment that says it is
deprecated (if it really is).
- Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-02-10 21:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-02-10 17:45 [PATCH v4 0/6] x86 CRC optimizations Eric Biggers
2025-02-10 17:45 ` [PATCH v4 1/6] x86: move ZMM exclusion list into CPU feature flag Eric Biggers
2025-02-10 20:40 ` Borislav Petkov
2025-02-10 21:01 ` Eric Biggers
2025-02-10 21:17 ` Borislav Petkov
2025-02-10 21:37 ` Eric Biggers [this message]
2025-02-10 21:49 ` Borislav Petkov
2025-02-10 17:45 ` [PATCH v4 2/6] scripts/gen-crc-consts: add gen-crc-consts.py Eric Biggers
2025-02-10 17:45 ` [PATCH v4 3/6] x86/crc: add "template" for [V]PCLMULQDQ based CRC functions Eric Biggers
2025-02-10 17:45 ` [PATCH v4 4/6] x86/crc32: implement crc32_le using new template Eric Biggers
2025-02-10 17:45 ` [PATCH v4 5/6] x86/crc-t10dif: implement crc_t10dif " Eric Biggers
2025-02-10 17:45 ` [PATCH v4 6/6] x86/crc64: implement crc64_be and crc64_nvme " Eric Biggers
2025-02-10 18:01 ` [PATCH v4 0/6] x86 CRC optimizations Eric Biggers
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=20250210213705.GD348261@sol.localdomain \
--to=ebiggers@kernel.org \
--cc=ardb@kernel.org \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=kbusch@kernel.org \
--cc=kent.overstreet@linux.dev \
--cc=linux-block@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).