From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5F653C433E0 for ; Mon, 1 Mar 2021 12:00:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D47B64E07 for ; Mon, 1 Mar 2021 12:00:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S234524AbhCAL7t (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Mar 2021 06:59:49 -0500 Received: from mail.skyhub.de ([5.9.137.197]:36774 "EHLO mail.skyhub.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S234065AbhCAL7o (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Mar 2021 06:59:44 -0500 Received: from zn.tnic (p200300ec2f03de007faa2800bd33f191.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [IPv6:2003:ec:2f03:de00:7faa:2800:bd33:f191]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.skyhub.de (SuperMail on ZX Spectrum 128k) with ESMTPSA id CA8801EC01E0; Mon, 1 Mar 2021 12:59:02 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=alien8.de; s=dkim; t=1614599942; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references; bh=9+LgblyYfLIgXAyx7H8SJ+o5wKr3vfOos7K1dku8iXc=; b=I0xGESE8bQh1HBVM+sjdOk72OIigwaXodn2wqO6ZpWSvBr6RdXwUeJ/IgAllqVSfiI9onS +hZ297OkqJjNqfnE7vvpBBDfn+zyqPqREFdQcD/5zoCdq/LUgjzfiEg2MTV2EgFKdz2OVT tH5C5z9A8+17jIIRPiUyJMWTbbNX0BI= Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2021 12:58:54 +0100 From: Borislav Petkov To: Kai Huang Cc: kvm@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, linux-sgx@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, seanjc@google.com, jarkko@kernel.org, luto@kernel.org, dave.hansen@intel.com, rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com, haitao.huang@intel.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, tglx@linutronix.de, mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/25] x86/cpufeatures: Add SGX1 and SGX2 sub-features Message-ID: <20210301115854.GE6699@zn.tnic> References: <20210301100037.GA6699@zn.tnic> <3fce1dd2abd42597bde7ae9496bde7b9596b2797.camel@intel.com> <20210301103043.GB6699@zn.tnic> <7603ef673997b6674f785d333a4f263c749d2cf3.camel@intel.com> <20210301105346.GC6699@zn.tnic> <20210301113257.GD6699@zn.tnic> <0adc41774945bf9d6e6a72a93b83c80aa8c59544.camel@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <0adc41774945bf9d6e6a72a93b83c80aa8c59544.camel@intel.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Mar 02, 2021 at 12:43:06AM +1300, Kai Huang wrote: > To confirm, if we suppress both "sgx1" and "sgx2" in /proc/cpuinfo, we > don't need to add "why to suppress" in commit message, right? You should always explain in a patch why you're doing the change. So that a reviewer knows. And then people in the future can follow why you've made that decision. Always. -- Regards/Gruss, Boris. https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette