[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3E5A0FA7E9CA944F9D5414FEC6C712207589CA3A@ORSMSX106.amr.corp.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2017 19:37:29 +0000
From: "Yu, Fenghua" <fenghua.yu@...el.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
CC: "Kammela, Gayatri" <gayatri.kammela@...el.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"hpa@...ux.intel.com" <hpa@...ux.intel.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"Kleen, Andi" <andi.kleen@...el.com>,
"Shankar, Ravi V" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
"Neri, Ricardo" <ricardo.neri@...el.com>,
"Zhong, Yang" <yang.zhong@...el.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2] x86/cpufeatures: Enable new SSE/AVX/AVX512 cpu
features
> On Tuesday, October 31, 2017 11:33 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 06:25:55PM +0000, Yu, Fenghua wrote:
> > We may need to send a patch to fix a few legacy names that don't match
> > exactly specs, e.g. AVX512VBMI as you mentioned.
>
> Or we can make them all uniform and ignore the spec. It's not like they would
> be harder to grep afterwards.
Should we change the legacy names as well? User apps may use the names already. Changing the names may break the apps.
If we do make all uniform, do you prefer adding "_" after AVX512?
Thanks.
-Fenghua
Powered by blists - more mailing lists