Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-185182-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.48.161 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.48.161;
Date: Tue, 21 May 2024 08:48:34 -0700
From: Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>, x86@kernel.org,
	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
	"Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com>,
	Rick Edgecombe <rick.p.edgecombe@intel.com>,
	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>, Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com>,
	Thomas Renninger <trenn@suse.de>, Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, patches@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 02/49] x86/cpu: Fix x86_match_cpu() to match just
 X86_VENDOR_INTEL
Message-ID: <ZkzCUj7zCcGPT-IX@agluck-desk3.sc.intel.com>
References: <20240520224620.9480-1-tony.luck@intel.com>
 <20240520224620.9480-3-tony.luck@intel.com>
 <20240521074947.GAZkxSG_u08uLDqZ_m@fat_crate.local>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20240521074947.GAZkxSG_u08uLDqZ_m@fat_crate.local>

On Tue, May 21, 2024 at 09:49:47AM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Mon, May 20, 2024 at 03:45:33PM -0700, Tony Luck wrote:
> > Fixes: 644e9cbbe3fc ("Add driver auto probing for x86 features v4")
> 
> Do you really want to backport this to everything since 2012, as that
> patch is from then?

I didn't include a Cc: stable. Is there some better way to report
the source commit for a problem without triggering a backport?

> 
> > @@ -690,6 +690,7 @@ struct x86_cpu_id {
> >  	__u16 model;
> >  	__u16 steppings;
> >  	__u16 feature;	/* bit index */
> > +	__u16 flags;
> >  	kernel_ulong_t driver_data;
> >  };
> >  
> > @@ -700,6 +701,9 @@ struct x86_cpu_id {
> >  #define X86_STEPPING_ANY 0
> >  #define X86_FEATURE_ANY 0	/* Same as FPU, you can't test for that */
> >  
> > +/* x86_cpu_id::flags */
> > +#define X86_CPU_ID_FLAG_ENTRY_VALID	BIT(0)
> 
> I would definitely not want to have those visible in userspace.
> 
> IOW, something like this:

Agreed. Looks better to keep the define out of a <linux/*.h> file.

Do you want me to spin a new patch? Or can you fold your change into
my patch when applying?

-Tony