linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5 1/3] cpuid: cleanup cpuid

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:   Thu, 10 Nov 2016 11:45:01 +0100
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     He Chen <he.chen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     kvm@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org,
        Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
        Radim Krčmář <rkrcmar@...hat.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        "H . Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
        Luwei Kang <luwei.kang@...el.com>,
        Piotr Luc <Piotr.Luc@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 1/3] cpuid: cleanup cpuid_regs definitions

On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 07:05:26PM +0800, He Chen wrote:
> make cpuid_regs more clear and avoid potential name clash.
> 
> Signed-off-by: He Chen <he.chen@...ux.intel.com>

Btw, please name your subjects like this:

x86/cpuid: Cleanup ...

Also the name should be a complete sentence starting with a capital
letter.

The last patch, the 3/3 should be called something like "x86/kvm: ..."
or so.

...

> @@ -31,14 +24,14 @@ void init_scattered_cpuid_features(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
>  	const struct cpuid_bit *cb;
>  
>  	static const struct cpuid_bit cpuid_bits[] = {
> -		{ X86_FEATURE_INTEL_PT,		CR_EBX,25, 0x00000007, 0 },
> -		{ X86_FEATURE_AVX512_4VNNIW,	CR_EDX, 2, 0x00000007, 0 },
> -		{ X86_FEATURE_AVX512_4FMAPS,	CR_EDX, 3, 0x00000007, 0 },
> -		{ X86_FEATURE_APERFMPERF,	CR_ECX, 0, 0x00000006, 0 },
> -		{ X86_FEATURE_EPB,		CR_ECX, 3, 0x00000006, 0 },
> -		{ X86_FEATURE_HW_PSTATE,	CR_EDX, 7, 0x80000007, 0 },
> -		{ X86_FEATURE_CPB,		CR_EDX, 9, 0x80000007, 0 },
> -		{ X86_FEATURE_PROC_FEEDBACK,	CR_EDX,11, 0x80000007, 0 },
> +		{ X86_FEATURE_INTEL_PT,		CPUID_EBX,25, 0x00000007, 0 },
> +		{ X86_FEATURE_AVX512_4VNNIW,	CPUID_EDX, 2, 0x00000007, 0 },
> +		{ X86_FEATURE_AVX512_4FMAPS,	CPUID_EDX, 3, 0x00000007, 0 },
> +		{ X86_FEATURE_APERFMPERF,	CPUID_ECX, 0, 0x00000006, 0 },
> +		{ X86_FEATURE_EPB,		CPUID_ECX, 3, 0x00000006, 0 },
> +		{ X86_FEATURE_HW_PSTATE,	CPUID_EDX, 7, 0x80000007, 0 },
> +		{ X86_FEATURE_CPB,		CPUID_EDX, 9, 0x80000007, 0 },
> +		{ X86_FEATURE_PROC_FEEDBACK,	CPUID_EDX,11, 0x80000007, 0 },

ERROR: space required after that ',' (ctx:VxV)
#150: FILE: arch/x86/kernel/cpu/scattered.c:27:
+               { X86_FEATURE_INTEL_PT,         CPUID_EBX,25, 0x00000007, 0 },
                                                         ^

ERROR: space required after that ',' (ctx:VxV)
#157: FILE: arch/x86/kernel/cpu/scattered.c:34:
+               { X86_FEATURE_PROC_FEEDBACK,    CPUID_EDX,11, 0x80000007, 0 },
                                                         ^

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.