[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALCETrVToTrLQEbmXugja_Aif8LcZ7kX8Shu0Gg-FOx6w0p48A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2020 10:15:04 -0700
From: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>
To: "Chang S. Bae" <chang.seok.bae@...el.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...e.de>,
Andrew Lutomirski <luto@...nel.org>, X86 ML <x86@...nel.org>,
Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>, jing2.liu@...el.com,
"Ravi V. Shankar" <ravi.v.shankar@...el.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:DOCUMENTATION" <linux-doc@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 22/22] x86/fpu/xstate: Introduce boot-parameters for
control some state component support
On Thu, Oct 1, 2020 at 1:43 PM Chang S. Bae <chang.seok.bae@...el.com> wrote:
>
> "xstate.disable=0x6000" will disable AMX on a system that has AMX compiled
> into XFEATURE_MASK_USER_SUPPORTED.
Can we please use words for this? Perhaps:
xstate.disable=amx,zmm
and maybe add a list in /proc/cpuinfo or somewhere in /proc or /sys
that shows all the currently enabled xsave states.
>
> "xstate.enable=0x6000" will enable AMX on a system that does NOT have AMX
> compiled into XFEATURE_MASK_USER_SUPPORTED (assuming the kernel is new
> enough to support this feature).
This sounds like it will be quite confusing to anyone reading the
kernel code to discover that a feature that is not "SUPPORTED" is
nonetheless enabled.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists