linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] x86/cpu: Add two Intel CPU model numbers

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: <6ec8839e-cdd9-4607-8556-dd412aed41a5@intel.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Feb 2025 08:23:32 -0800
From: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...el.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
Cc: "andrew.cooper3@...rix.com" <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>,
 "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
 "patches@...ts.linux.dev" <patches@...ts.linux.dev>,
 "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86/cpu: Add two Intel CPU model numbers

On 2/14/25 05:02, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Isn't the only reason we're doing a new Family because we can out of
> module number space? It's not magically different from Fam6.

Right. That was the primary motivation.

But the new scheme should also make a little more logical sense. The
family numbers are supposed to move up at a steady rate and also
separate desktop and server.

Or maybe we'll realize we miss all the fun of family 6 and just start
shoving everything as models in family 19 randomly instead. ;)