linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] x86/cpu: Introduce INTEL_CPU_FAM*

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]

Message-ID: <20190114110825.GJ2773@zn.tnic>
Date:   Mon, 14 Jan 2019 12:08:25 +0100
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To:     Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, x86@...nel.org,
        "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rjw@...ysocki.net>,
        linux-acpi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] x86/cpu: Introduce INTEL_CPU_FAM*_NODATA() helper
 macros

On Wed, Jan 09, 2019 at 06:57:52PM +0200, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> These macros are often used by the drivers and we have already a lot of
> duplication as ICPU() macro across them.
> 
> Provide a generic x86 macro for users.
> 
> This adds no driver data variants.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Andy Shevchenko <andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com>
> ---
>  arch/x86/include/asm/intel-family.h | 10 ++++++++--
>  1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/intel-family.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/intel-family.h
> index 25b28760fada..afd70055a750 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/intel-family.h
> +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/intel-family.h
> @@ -86,10 +86,16 @@
>  	.family		= _family,				\
>  	.model		= _model,				\
>  	.feature	= X86_FEATURE_ANY,			\
> -	.driver_data	= (kernel_ulong_t)&_driver_data		\
> +	.driver_data	= (kernel_ulong_t)_driver_data		\
>  }
>  
>  #define INTEL_CPU_FAM6(_model, _driver_data)			\
> -	INTEL_CPU_FAM_ANY(6, INTEL_FAM6_##_model, _driver_data)
> +	INTEL_CPU_FAM_ANY(6, INTEL_FAM6_##_model, &_driver_data)
> +
> +#define INTEL_CPU_FAM_ANY_NODATA(_family, _model)		\

"ANY_NODATA" is confusing IMO, as I have no clue what that means. ICPU()
and the full model define was fine.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

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