[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Z8bKEaEWAbE4F1gk@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2025 10:38:25 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: "Ahmed S. Darwish" <darwi@...utronix.de>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
John Ogness <john.ogness@...utronix.de>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@...rix.com>, x86@...nel.org,
x86-cpuid@...ts.linux.dev, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 00/40] x86: Leaf 0x2 and leaf 0x4 refactorings
* Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
> > Summary:
> >
> > - Patches 1 to 3 are independent bugfixes that were discovered during
> > this refactoring work.
>
> I've applied these three to tip:x86/urgent. I added Cc: stable to all 3
> commits, because while these are old bugs, the first one had Cc: stable
> and if we do it for one it's justified for all of them AFAICS. Arguably
> our cacheinfo output in procps was inaccurate at times, and possibly
> these bugs were part of the problem.
>
> > - Patches 4 to 10 are x86/cpu refactorings for code size and
> > readability.
>
> I've applied patches 4 to 9 to tip:x86/cpu (with x86/urgent merged in
> due to dependencies and to give a singular topical base branch in the
> x86 tree), they look good and obvious. (I added the build fix to 05/40)
>
> I've left 10 to 40 for further review by others too.
While going through the rest I also picked up these patches as easy
preparatory commits in tip:x86/cpu, there was no reason to have them
later in the series:
29517791c478 x86/cacheinfo: Remove the P4 trace leftovers for real
d61b5118f719 x86/cacheinfo: Remove unnecessary headers and reorder the rest
0d22030c49bf <linux/sizes.h>: Cover all possible x86 CPU cache sizes
Thanks,
Ingo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists