Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Tue, 6 Aug 2019 17:57:16 +0200
From:   Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To:     Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
Cc:     tglx@linutronix.de, fenghua.yu@intel.com, tony.luck@intel.com,
        kuo-lang.tseng@intel.com, mingo@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com,
        x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 01/10] x86/CPU: Expose if cache is inclusive of lower
 level caches
Message-ID: <20190806155716.GE25897@zn.tnic>
References: <cover.1564504901.git.reinette.chatre@intel.com>
 <6c78593207224014d6a9d43698a3d1a0b3ccf2b6.1564504901.git.reinette.chatre@intel.com>
 <20190802180352.GE30661@zn.tnic>
 <e532ab90-196c-8b58-215a-f56f5e409512@intel.com>
 <20190803094423.GA2100@zn.tnic>
 <122b005a-46b1-2b1e-45a8-7f92a5dba2d9@intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <122b005a-46b1-2b1e-45a8-7f92a5dba2d9@intel.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Aug 05, 2019 at 10:57:04AM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> What do you think?

Actually, I was thinking about something a lot simpler: something
along the lines of adding the CPUID check in a helper function which
rdt_pseudo_lock_init() calls. If the cache is not inclusive - and my
guess is it would suffice to check any cache but I'd prefer you correct
me on that - you simply return error and rdt_pseudo_lock_init() returns
early without doing any futher init.

How does that sound?

Thx.

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
    Boris.

Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.