linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/cpu: Rename Denverton and Gemini Lake

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 8 Aug 2018 16:07:04 +0200
From:   Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc:     Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
        kan.liang@...ux.intel.com, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/cpu: Rename Denverton and Gemini Lake

On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 7:16 AM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de> wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Aug 2018, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > It's even worse with Silvermont.
> > >
> > > So no, the interesting information is the UARCH and the variant of that,
> >
> > With Uarch you mean the core uarch?  That doesn't really work for
> > something like Silvermont or Goldmont.
> >
> > > e.g. UARCH_CLIENT, UARCH_SERVER, UARCH_WHATEVER. All the magic Code Names
> >
> > Right your scheme totally doesn't work on Silvermont because there
> > are multiple client variants.
>
> We have that for the big cores as well:
>
> #define INTEL_FAM6_HASWELL_CORE         0x3C
> #define INTEL_FAM6_HASWELL_X            0x3F
> #define INTEL_FAM6_HASWELL_ULT          0x45
> #define INTEL_FAM6_HASWELL_GT3E         0x46
>
> Why would we treat ATOM differently? It's all the same scheme:
>
> SILVERMONT_CLIENT       0x37         Baytrail, Valleyview
> SILVERMONT_SERVER       0x40         Avaton, Rangely

0x5D SoFIA is another Silvermont variant on the client side, and doesn't
fit well in that scheme I'd say. Calling it SILVERMONT_SOFIA would
probably be best here so people can figure out what it is.

     Arnd