[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <a836f75c-0962-46e1-98ff-984eef42865b@intel.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2026 14:35:46 -0800
From: Sohil Mehta <sohil.mehta@...el.com>
To: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>, "Hansen, Dave" <dave.hansen@...el.com>
CC: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>, "Liu, Zhao1"
<zhao1.liu@...el.com>, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>, "H. Peter Anvin"
<hpa@...or.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, "Kohler, Jon"
<jon@...anix.com>, Pawan Gupta <pawan.kumar.gupta@...ux.intel.com>, "Peter
Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@...radead.org>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...nel.org>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>, "Winiarska, Iwona"
<iwona.winiarska@...el.com>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/6] x86/cpu: Break Vendor/Family/Model macros into
separate header
On 2/11/2026 2:32 PM, Luck, Tony wrote:
>>> + device->info.device_id = cpu_id >> 4;
>>>
>>
>> I imagine this shifting the stepping. Should this be cpu_id & 0xF?
>
> Fixing here seems to be better than changing the constants. But needs a "~"
>
> /* Ignore the stepping */
> device->info.device_id = cpu_id & ~ 0xF;
>
Ah, yes! Error while fixing an error :)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists