linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/1] x86/cpu: Add INTEL_LUNARLAKE_M to X86_BUG

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAJZ5v0hm8LenFyQBrORmreGWh+4dWoJeCLRngJOZSq3UVhnNOQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2024 16:02:25 +0100
From: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>
To: Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org>
Cc: "Rafael J. Wysocki" <rafael@...nel.org>, peterz@...radead.org, tglx@...utronix.de, 
	x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-pm@...r.kernel.org, 
	Len Brown <len.brown@...el.com>, stable@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] x86/cpu: Add INTEL_LUNARLAKE_M to X86_BUG_MONITOR

On Tue, Nov 12, 2024 at 3:02 PM Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2024 at 8:14 AM Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Nov 12, 2024 at 2:12 PM Len Brown <lenb@...nel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Nov 12, 2024 at 6:44 AM Rafael J. Wysocki <rafael@...nel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > > -       if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_MWAIT) && c->x86_vfm == INTEL_ATOM_GOLDMONT)
> > > > > +       if (boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_MWAIT) &&
> > > > > +           (c->x86_vfm == INTEL_ATOM_GOLDMONT
> > > > > +            || c->x86_vfm == INTEL_LUNARLAKE_M))
> > > >
> > > > I would put the || at the end of the previous line, that is
> > >
> > >
> > > It isn't my personal preference for human readability either,
> > > but this is what scripts/Lindent does...
> >
> > Well, it doesn't match the coding style of the first line ...
>
> Fair observation.
>
> I'll bite.
>
> If you took the existing intel.c and added it as a patch to the kernel,
> the resulting checkpatch would have 6 errors and 33 warnings.
>
> If you ran Lindent on the existing intel.c, the resulting diff would be
> 408 lines --  1 file changed, 232 insertions(+), 176 deletions(-)
>
> This for a file that is only 1300 lines long.
>
> If whitespace nirvana is the goal, tools are the answer, not the valuable
> cycles of human reviewers.

Well, the advice always given is to follow the coding style of the
given fine in the first place.

checkpatch reflects the preferences of its author is this particular
respect and maintainers' preferences tend to differ from one to
another.