On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 10:34:07AM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Let me know if I should include this patch via the KVM tree. Do you
> want it in 4.4?
Nah, no need.
I'll send the whole pile with your Reviewed-by's to Ingo so that they
all go together. I'll run them some more on my boxes first th
On 18/11/2015 19:50, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 12:35:24PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> Yes, exactly. I'm suggesting that the same applies to x86_vendor(). I
>> also prefer x86_cpuid_* to x86_*_cpuid because, once you add two
>> functions in the same family it's nice tha
On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 12:35:24PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Yes, exactly. I'm suggesting that the same applies to x86_vendor(). I
> also prefer x86_cpuid_* to x86_*_cpuid because, once you add two
> functions in the same family it's nice that they share a prefix.
Ok, makes sense:
---
commi
On 18/11/2015 12:28, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>> On 14/11/2015 11:37, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>>> > > vendor = x86_vendor();
>>> > > - family = x86_family();
>>> > > + family = x86_family_cpuid();
>> >
>> > What about renaming x86_vendor() so that this looks like
>> >
>> > - v
On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 12:10:08PM +0100, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> On 14/11/2015 11:37, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> > vendor = x86_vendor();
> > - family = x86_family();
> > + family = x86_family_cpuid();
>
> What about renaming x86_vendor() so that this looks like
>
> - vendor = x86_vendo
On 14/11/2015 11:37, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> vendor = x86_vendor();
> - family = x86_family();
> + family = x86_family_cpuid();
What about renaming x86_vendor() so that this looks like
- vendor = x86_vendor();
- family = x86_family();
+ vendor = x86_cpuid_vendor
From: Borislav Petkov
Add generic functions which calc family, model and stepping from the
CPUID_1.EAX leaf and stick them into the library we have.
No functionality change.
Signed-off-by: Borislav Petkov
---
arch/x86/include/asm/cpu.h| 3 +++
arch/x86/include/asm/microcode.h
7 matches
Mail list logo