From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755482AbbLGJpQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Dec 2015 04:45:16 -0500 Received: from mail-wm0-f42.google.com ([74.125.82.42]:37649 "EHLO mail-wm0-f42.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753633AbbLGJpO (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Dec 2015 04:45:14 -0500 Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2015 10:45:04 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Borislav Petkov Cc: LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] x86/cpufeature: Remove unused and seldomly used cpu_has_xx macros Message-ID: <20151207094504.GA27386@gmail.com> References: <1449481182-27541-1-git-send-email-bp@alien8.de> <1449481182-27541-4-git-send-email-bp@alien8.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1449481182-27541-4-git-send-email-bp@alien8.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Borislav Petkov wrote: > static int __init chacha20_simd_mod_init(void) > { > - if (!cpu_has_ssse3) > + if (!boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_SSSE3)) > return -ENODEV; Btw., could we rename 'boot_cpu_has()' to the more appropriate (and shorter!) 'system_has()' form? 'boot cpu' is a conceptual misnomer here really: it's just an implementational detail that we are looking at the boot CPU's flags, what we really mean to express is that these are system-wide features with no per-cpu properties. Agreed? Thanks, Ingo