linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH 01/74] x86/cpu/vfm: Add/initialize x86_vfm field to struct cpuinfo

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: <SJ1PR11MB6083DA36FF995724D3C1273DFC3B2@SJ1PR11MB6083.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 2024 20:52:49 +0000
From: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
CC: "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
	<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 01/74] x86/cpu/vfm: Add/initialize x86_vfm field to struct
 cpuinfo_x86

> I don't think the format is really that big an issue. Including stepping in the
> format adds complexity to a thousand places these checks are made while
> only being useful in a few dozen.

Stats to back that up:

$ git grep INTEL_FAM6 | wc -l
876

but some of those are the definitions of the model name macros:
$ git grep INTEL_FAM6 -- arch/x86/include/asm/intel-family.h | wc -l
82

Places using the X86_MATCH_INTEL macros don't show in above count:

$ git grep X86_MATCH_INTEL | wc -l
430

Places that use STEPPINGS:
$ git grep X86_MATCH_INTEL_FAM6_MODEL_STEPPINGS | wc -l
21

or STEPPINGS + FEATURE
$ git grep gg X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL_STEPPINGS_FEATURE | wc -l
6

$ git grep x86_stepping | wc -l
83

-Tony