From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [192.198.163.14]) (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 03EF41C6AE for ; Tue, 21 May 2024 15:48:36 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.14 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1716306518; cv=none; b=fh6LrXvNNFOxU7/UyTZ9wjWjPaAe4JoFpup1LVTm02pZblOTBK8AmpX6O/OyxDt0DiJFQJiK5/FqSYTviQ/n77nSWp6GyD7eTVtYKPqclD/6k4WL+6H+IGAwXEjpvj7y730v3X7oiBQpO6NJHzoIzo8Y8i/3cbOxVEBDRTBsbOg= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1716306518; c=relaxed/simple; bh=pmM6ansB1dZBHsDH5k5F1CVlJa0N3KOCL5F3ugY4XZs=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=oSvQDxVDdYLHfNg1DDFd5ZTS3YU2TlptEt2Q1MSwf7fQjxyAeSyLn5ueBP4J0ZRQJesHB2LZpmZwMFhBW4dm8fH6ucmHlS2ITFUMmj9BtOpJ8gml+Cpdf6gUd/9B0+VnbBXhCOzbtIOPp6vY/BdXZ4TX+s27cPsuHFe2hvUgSb0= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=j3jEYlKS; arc=none smtp.client-ip=192.198.163.14 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="j3jEYlKS" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1716306517; x=1747842517; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=pmM6ansB1dZBHsDH5k5F1CVlJa0N3KOCL5F3ugY4XZs=; b=j3jEYlKSnrBqztZtWNDamYE91zg1ZBSekZKlj6dezTWX736vQIRliQel 1Xur66nASPWJ6W7m9DQaO5NNMcUGJyvbAEw1NLQbqOyJksAOi8C7L52eq CFShw9mftX/FeuYOawpUFr2so9ajABOedqVHfQdNbnn4gEC6FsduQfroV SnFIkILzLdKyrimF4FrDimcKOW/vjF4bw/RmT9VHfsyBgLzU1wflxaWRJ AlFBJn8JN1BS6twCx1UEdeiE/8KUQnxkgpg0q7YDudIXIM5opxSxcqpsw 69oVqKcE0tCstoNzin9PFpS8OPM7b8Cd4U0Kv8Ro4aCYpB2iPhO27TTgt g==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: 0O2DElxbR+KpYswO6xkqsw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: JJPpo4TrSMa54jRzcKxRsw== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,11078"; a="12740356" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.08,178,1712646000"; d="scan'208";a="12740356" Received: from fmviesa004.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.144]) by fmvoesa108.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 21 May 2024 08:48:36 -0700 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: ea1Ln2QSRiyduUE4IWDW5g== X-CSE-MsgGUID: uKpOg7O+Rk+t4ZiKxK7GsA== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.08,178,1712646000"; d="scan'208";a="37546261" Received: from agluck-desk3.sc.intel.com ([172.25.222.70]) by fmviesa004-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 21 May 2024 08:48:35 -0700 Date: Tue, 21 May 2024 08:48:34 -0700 From: Tony Luck To: Borislav Petkov Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Dave Hansen , x86@kernel.org, "H. Peter Anvin" , "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" , Uros Bizjak , Rick Edgecombe , Arnd Bergmann , Mateusz Guzik , Thomas Renninger , Andi Kleen , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, patches@lists.linux.dev Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 02/49] x86/cpu: Fix x86_match_cpu() to match just X86_VENDOR_INTEL Message-ID: References: <20240520224620.9480-1-tony.luck@intel.com> <20240520224620.9480-3-tony.luck@intel.com> <20240521074947.GAZkxSG_u08uLDqZ_m@fat_crate.local> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: patches@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: <20240521074947.GAZkxSG_u08uLDqZ_m@fat_crate.local> On Tue, May 21, 2024 at 09:49:47AM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Mon, May 20, 2024 at 03:45:33PM -0700, Tony Luck wrote: > > Fixes: 644e9cbbe3fc ("Add driver auto probing for x86 features v4") > > Do you really want to backport this to everything since 2012, as that > patch is from then? I didn't include a Cc: stable. Is there some better way to report the source commit for a problem without triggering a backport? > > > @@ -690,6 +690,7 @@ struct x86_cpu_id { > > __u16 model; > > __u16 steppings; > > __u16 feature; /* bit index */ > > + __u16 flags; > > kernel_ulong_t driver_data; > > }; > > > > @@ -700,6 +701,9 @@ struct x86_cpu_id { > > #define X86_STEPPING_ANY 0 > > #define X86_FEATURE_ANY 0 /* Same as FPU, you can't test for that */ > > > > +/* x86_cpu_id::flags */ > > +#define X86_CPU_ID_FLAG_ENTRY_VALID BIT(0) > > I would definitely not want to have those visible in userspace. > > IOW, something like this: Agreed. Looks better to keep the define out of a file. Do you want me to spin a new patch? Or can you fold your change into my patch when applying? -Tony