linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3 RESEND 0/6] Add support for upcoming chips to k10temp and amd

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: <d4e2678b-d515-f580-3644-e03979390914@amd.com>
Date:   Wed, 20 Jul 2022 10:30:38 -0500
From:   "Limonciello, Mario" <mario.limonciello@....com>
To:     Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
Cc:     Clemens Ladisch <clemens@...isch.de>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
        linux-hwmon@...r.kernel.org, babu.moger@....com,
        yazen.ghannam@....com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, x86@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 RESEND 0/6] Add support for upcoming chips to k10temp
 and amd_nb

On 7/20/2022 10:22, Guenter Roeck wrote:
> On 7/20/22 07:45, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 02:52:50PM -0500, Mario Limonciello wrote:
>>> This series started as what looked like a correction to previous
>>> commits, but I missed that the previous commits were for a different
>>> family with the same chip models.  So while fixing up the series I also
>>> noticed that a few upcoming chips have new PCIe IDs and CCD offsets not
>>> yet supported, so add them to amd_nb/k10temp.
>>>
>>> v2->v3
>>>   * Pick up tags
>>>   * Group "ROOT" PCI IDs with others in patches 2 and 3.
>>> v1->v2:
>>>   * Correct commit messages
>>>   * Add more missing chips and offsets
>>>   * since so much changed, do not include Bjorn's Ack.
>>>
>>> V3 original submission:
>>> * 
>>> https://nam11.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flore.kernel.org%2Flkml%2F20220613192956.4911-1-mario.limonciello%40amd.com%2F%23t&amp;data=05%7C01%7Cmario.limonciello%40amd.com%7Cccd318a2336a4fff464e08da6a63adf5%7C3dd8961fe4884e608e11a82d994e183d%7C0%7C0%7C637939273635072576%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&amp;sdata=WHsUYbBtu0ka4S2jiji%2BKaFycbTAHz%2B1RoANXo4maf0%3D&amp;reserved=0 
>>>
>>>
>>> Mario Limonciello (6):
>>>    x86/amd_nb: Add AMD Family 17h A0-AF IDs
>>>    x86/amd_nb: Add Family 19h model 70h-7Fh IDs
>>>    x86/amd_nb: Add Family 19h model 60h-6Fh IDs
>>>    hwmon: (k10temp): Add support for family 17h models A0h-AFh
>>>    hwmon: (k10temp): Add support for family 19h models 70h-7Fh
>>>    hwmon: (k10temp): Add support for family 19h models 60h-6Fh
>>
>> Is there any particular reason why those are split into such small
>> pieces?
>>
>> I'd expect one patch adding all PCI IDs and a second patch doing the
>> k10temp changes.
>>
>> If no particular reason, I'll compact them all 6 into 2.
>>
> Ok with me.
> 

It was mostly for review purpose so that other AMD guys could comment if 
I fumbled the DID or offsets for a product or if someone wanted to test 
it independently on a particular product but didn't have the others to test.

At this point that's fine with me too to combine them; thanks.