linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/9] Add CPU-type to topology

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]

Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2024 23:23:58 -0700
From: Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com>
To: Brice Goglin <brice.goglin@...il.com>
Cc: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>,
	srinivas pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...ux.intel.com>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, x86@...nel.org,
	daniel.sneddon@...ux.intel.com, tony.luck@...el.com,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
	Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>,
	"Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>,
	Ricardo Neri <ricardo.neri-calderon@...ux.intel.com>,
	"Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>,
	Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/9] Add CPU-type to topology

On Thu, Jun 20, 2024 at 05:22:59PM +0200, Brice Goglin wrote:
> Le 20/06/2024 à 17:06, Dave Hansen a écrit :
> 
> > On 6/19/24 14:25, Brice Goglin wrote:
> > > Good point. From this patch series, I understand that the current kernel
> > > side doesn't care about these different E-cores. However it might be
> > > good to expose them as different cpu-types (or better name) to userspace ?
> > > 
> > > Something like type 0 = P-core, 1 = normal E-core, 2 = low power E-core ?
> > The first priority here is getting the kernel to comprehend these types
> > for architectural purposes: when there are functional differences
> > between the cores.
> > 
> > Let's get that in place, first.  Then we can discuss the possibility of
> > new ABI in the area.
> 
> Agreed.

Sorry replying late, I was on vacation. Yes, let's leave the ABI for
another series when we have a clear use case.