From: Sean Christopherson <seanjc@google.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@kernel.org>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, X86 ML <x86@kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Borislav Petkov (AMD)" <bp@alien8.de>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] x86/cpufeatures: Flip the /proc/cpuinfo appearance logic
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2024 07:06:13 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZnGUVcEUUF_1Vqmi@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240618113840.24163-1-bp@kernel.org>
On Tue, Jun 18, 2024, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> From: "Borislav Petkov (AMD)" <bp@alien8.de>
>
> I'm getting tired of telling people to put a magic "" in the
>
> #define X86_FEATURE /* "" ... */
>
> comment to hide the new feature flag from the user-visible
> /proc/cpuinfo.
>
> Flip the logic to make it explicit: an explicit "<name>" in the comment
> adds the flag to /proc/cpuinfo and otherwise not, by default.
>
> Add the "<name>" of all the existing flags to keep backwards
> compatibility with userspace.
If we're going to churn the whole file, why not take the opportunity make it more
structured? E.g. use a variadic macro so the name doesn't need to be buried in a
string inside a comment, and so that each feature doesn't have to open code the
math. Lack of third input omits the flag from /proc/cpuinfo, and a magic keyword,
e.g. AUTO, uses the feature name.
There are quite a few games that could be played with macros, and IMO pretty much
all of them would be better than comment+string shenanigans.
#define X86F(word, bit, abi_name...) ((word) * 32 + bit)
#define X86_FEATURE_FPU X86F(0, 0, AUTO)
#define X86_FEATURE_XMM X86F(0, 25, SSE2)
#define X86_FEATURE_K8 X86F(3, 4)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-06-18 14:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-18 11:38 [RFC PATCH] x86/cpufeatures: Flip the /proc/cpuinfo appearance logic Borislav Petkov
2024-06-18 14:06 ` Sean Christopherson [this message]
2024-06-18 18:36 ` Borislav Petkov
2024-06-18 15:46 ` Dave Hansen
2024-06-19 8:11 ` H. Peter Anvin
2024-06-20 18:40 ` Borislav Petkov
2024-06-21 10:31 ` [tip: x86/cpu] " tip-bot2 for Borislav Petkov (AMD)
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=ZnGUVcEUUF_1Vqmi@google.com \
--to=seanjc@google.com \
--cc=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=bp@kernel.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.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