[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y1LGkTXCksqAYLHD@zn.tnic>
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2022 18:19:29 +0200
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Maxim Levitsky <mlevitsk@...hat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
"Chang S. Bae" <chang.seok.bae@...el.com>,
Jane Malalane <jane.malalane@...rix.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
"maintainer:X86 ARCHITECTURE (32-BIT AND 64-BIT)" <x86@...nel.org>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
"open list:CRYPTO API" <linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/5] x86/cpuid: refactor
setup_clear_cpu_cap()/clear_cpu_cap()
On Mon, Jul 18, 2022 at 05:11:20PM +0300, Maxim Levitsky wrote:
> Currently setup_clear_cpu_cap passes NULL 'struct cpuinfo_x86*'
> to clear_cpu_cap to indicate that capability should be cleared from boot_cpu_data.
>
> Later that is used in clear_feature to do recursive call to
> clear_cpu_cap together with clearing the feature bit from 'cpu_caps_cleared'
>
> Remove that code and just call the do_clear_cpu_cap on boot_cpu_data directly
> from the setup_clear_cpu_cap.
>
> The only functional change this introduces is that now calling clear_cpu_cap
> explicitly on boot_cpu_data also sets the bits in cpu_caps_cleared,
> which is the only thing that makes sense anyway.
>
> All callers of both functions were checked for this and fixed.
Change looks ok. What I can't grok is this sentence: what was checked
and fixed where?
What does need fixing and why?
Thx.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
Powered by blists - more mailing lists