Re: [PATCH 0/7] x86/topology: Improve CPUID.1F handling

[Zhang Rui <rui.zhang@intel.com>]

On Fri, 2022-08-12 at 09:09 -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 8/12/22 08:08, Zhang Rui wrote:
> > On Intel AlderLake-N platforms where there are Ecores only, the
> > Ecore
> > Module topology is enumerated via CPUID.1F Module level, which has
> > not
> > been supported by Linux kernel yet.
> > 
> > This exposes two issues in current CPUID.1F handling code.
> > 1. Linux interprets the Module id bits as package id and
> > erroneously
> > reports a multi module system as a multi-package system.
> > 2. Linux excludes the unknown Module id bits from the core_id, and
> > results in duplicate core_id’s shown in a package after the first
> > issue
> > solved.
> > 
> > Plus that, a third problem is observed on Intel Hybrid ADL-S/P
> > platforms. The return value of CPUID.1F SMT level EBX (number of
> > siblings) differs on Pcore CPUs and Ecore CPUs, and results in
> > inconsistent smp_num_siblings value based on the Pcore/Ecore CPU
> > enumeration order.
> > 
> > Patch 1/7 and 2/7 fix the first two issues. And at the same time,
> > it
> > reveals a reality that the core_id could be sparse on platforms
> > with
> > CPUID.1F support.
> > Patch 3/7 improves coretemp driver code to be able to handle sparse
> > and
> > large core id, which is the only driver that uses core_id as array
> > index and run on platforms with CPUID.1F support.
> > 
> 
> So far I only got this e-mail (and I don't find any of the other
> patches
> elsewhere either), and it looks like the hwmon mailing list was not
> copied
> on any of the patches. Please copy the hwmon mailing list for all
> changes
> in hwmon code.

Hi, Guenter,

Thanks for the quick response.
Yeah, I'm checking this, it seems that all my patches sent with git
send-email is blocked, let me retry.

thanks,
rui
> 
> Thanks,
> Guenter