Date:   Tue, 7 Feb 2023 11:42:09 +0800
From:   Feng Tang <feng.tang@intel.com>
To:     Terry Bowman <terry.bowman@amd.com>
CC:     <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <bp@suse.de>, <x86@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] tools/x86/kcpuid: Dump the CPUID function in
 detailed view
Message-ID: <Y+HIkTzNh4SXgVEc@feng-clx>
References: <20230206141832.4162264-1-terry.bowman@amd.com>
 <20230206141832.4162264-4-terry.bowman@amd.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230206141832.4162264-4-terry.bowman@amd.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount: 1
X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0: =?us-ascii?Q?T3FilHhIMAWFDHM0n8dSEEnr/FsmRcATebjr87pujRz98/3vTFx4lH3V2480?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?nUF6dfRnABMpEL+lxFao4LP1nGeyrkYSuHflnacNoT7QQURMjYIC4Z7KxxsS?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?it5jouOjTqhnk3VQPQyBdjJ3jeFDDh/vUqxECubdhr8oIoQs+BzrgWvxk54P?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?n1rPdqWme43VBdyOdai7uRiK0yZInE8ms/vr53vLe5HxzJ8Fa/emTTrxjtWv?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?zMuNekuZtlF+WffEdLMmsPKG4pyaMB65bQECA6KKgz8+ih9mw6WbpJwBYF2L?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?OfinjE8XLXwDDbTGXwOlCLAi0dK6cLR0CKNZ2LeCK0zJJ+ENHHZ9vjC8fPSW?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?r1QqKfywrQftb6I/pHEW8ds9L3ero+N4bb/GpMGYrG1Xe39uMUC/lLEmTl1U?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?wvFnyfjaN9izjb9K/OQIoyOR7MOtiqwt64VXf3IKXUp7dEx7KADuURbwwWRn?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?EK1kWPfgcGpI6zp4rbGeUhd5C0/B0g8Bmy1oHUdrPWqzGhhgTv0Hm2YtgP41?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?mJhrfOzJZeIP5zpFPYTIQsgEsjumO5dKSTbAxAW+WEe89t4+X5mXDXmRfAzd?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?FKycbqJAgzutfILegQXQ++L28OvFTf0c88X7A6Joq5B9aJHVKEtMWaSr/VRL?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?fIJYtPRpn+Um2YQnSpP6jxbmJyQyQGCCirs+/ClgWZqWKLKQmydmq6S588/W?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?5cYo6bPxwRl2g5UZdM2rxbBp8tNMWT8xMIqv9DGnFP7i6I0oVBJsZORc7YfB?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?kh1rGdBBGgKHK4EHWRYBUieSLPZmZWUPaeUgKIu61aPEp2lKh1US97u5xyyt?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?YjeCLzLRxKdpLRjzp9J5DM+PfIYxkiX9Wf8uGn5lv2l4XjdGjJDSLfV1OagB?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?FGu9p9PruY+GRwuVMYE+ek4xeC/02+rl09V+jWt24paV5cUZ+QcrXUjos+R/?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?hamL6LmcrgAfp5N10MmEGdccm+ySoE/qnj9RkA1gDJ0FSj91OydIKX+YmaB1?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?HZJ93Ueav2qbH01ymnoGbLhTatTrf8rDG6Wm5ZTi40fPFnKc0ChLbLNb4iPE?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?amS2jILdjJqSDBLPILgPeW5DZFjMjcyceaN8LxsJbicueu5Zfu/STohhqAEv?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?YXFFZZfbAGA0ljZnx44xB35q4Xux4xUjA1qq/Vmg+eXAP7yu5l3HjLY0+VCg?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?WXipvbnzTFtFsNzI1yeKilyHjuVh+93xpUv2U6CeGR9boGQzeEMPBoAwtYzo?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?PKSZmfvi6IG/EX0kCJCU5VxKdP3Mw+++T7/g2h0tYwv8CpNeR6xz/ohbqxdv?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?6smo0lxpgpMbeYZM5Ur2XxmsZ/bQKcdRHdYLfPy/FBIxNwCP+QAmkJyn0Bh/?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?XOgGtsF5TyWneOzT16aEMqJLmSEhippnzVcBvriFGlBYfpNgI9iCGkM5rZQs?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?s5o3v0wNkHTVrHZhWE0vACdggQxZFEQt3DcztTN0BdSQLaWEOegltgK5gdYE?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?pfJKooFboNqUEyoImxBkgIYDe1GPXo13iM4RGZkDX2rfm9mOSSxGUAzVuzn5?=
 =?us-ascii?Q?PIeDxugvj4b2kHe9Ce83+lf28SUVpHu3lO1gR574?=
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 0404457e-33a0-4023-27c8-08db08bdf1d2
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: MN0PR11MB6304.namprd11.prod.outlook.com
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-OriginalArrivalTime: 07 Feb 2023 03:46:50.3542
 (UTC)
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-FromEntityHeader: Hosted
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Id: 46c98d88-e344-4ed4-8496-4ed7712e255d
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-MailboxType: HOSTED
X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-UserPrincipalName: BmeKBmwnqEqqIRlAWRKsz+P36AO2Byf3OGvDarsQmimtQ2nMpJPeY7Ysy6dcnKdItSVpKK1i99+1uLvdvRy55A==
X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DS0PR11MB8206
X-OriginatorOrg: intel.com
Precedence: bulk
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Mon, Feb 06, 2023 at 08:18:32AM -0600, Terry Bowman wrote:
> From: "Borislav Petkov (AMD)" <bp@alien8.de>
> 
> Sometimes it is useful to know which CPUID leaf contains the fields so
> add it to -d output so that it looks like this:
> 
>   CPUID_0x8000001e_ECX[0x0]:
>            extended_apic_id       : 0x8           - Extended APIC ID
>            core_id                : 0x4           - Identifies the logical core ID
>            threads_per_core       : 0x1           - The number of threads per core is threads_per_core + 1
>            node_id                : 0x0           - Node ID
>            nodes_per_processor    : 0x0           - Nodes per processor { 0: 1 node, else reserved }
> 
>   CPUID_0x8000001f_ECX[0x0]:
>            sme                 -  Secure Memory Encryption

The idea looks good to me, as providing clear info.

I gave it a run on my box, and there are some item with no valid bits
definition, like:

"
CPUID_0xd_ECX[0x2]:

CPUID_0xd_ECX[0x5]:

CPUID_0xd_ECX[0x6]:

CPUID_0xd_ECX[0x7]:

CPUID_0xd_ECX[0x8]:
"

Maybe we can check the sum of subleaf->info.nr[EAX/EBX/ECX/EDX],
and only print it out when it is not zero.

Thanks,
Feng

> 
> ...
> 
> Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov (AMD) <bp@alien8.de>
> Signed-off-by: Terry Bowman <terry.bowman@amd.com>
> ---
>  tools/arch/x86/kcpuid/kcpuid.c | 10 +++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/arch/x86/kcpuid/kcpuid.c b/tools/arch/x86/kcpuid/kcpuid.c
> index dae75511fef7..3bab3398cec3 100644
> --- a/tools/arch/x86/kcpuid/kcpuid.c
> +++ b/tools/arch/x86/kcpuid/kcpuid.c
> @@ -468,13 +468,21 @@ static void show_leaf(struct subleaf *leaf)
>  	if (!leaf)
>  		return;
>  
> -	if (show_raw)
> +	if (show_raw) {
>  		leaf_print_raw(leaf);
> +	} else {
> +		if (show_details)
> +			printf("CPUID_0x%x_ECX[0x%x]:\n",
> +				leaf->index, leaf->sub);
> +	}
>  
>  	decode_bits(leaf->eax, &leaf->info[R_EAX]);
>  	decode_bits(leaf->ebx, &leaf->info[R_EBX]);
>  	decode_bits(leaf->ecx, &leaf->info[R_ECX]);
>  	decode_bits(leaf->edx, &leaf->info[R_EDX]);
> +
> +	if (!show_raw && show_details)
> +		printf("\n");
>  }
>  
>  static void show_func(struct cpuid_func *func)
> -- 
> 2.34.1
>