From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 958DAC02194 for ; Fri, 7 Feb 2025 17:34:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 078A86B0085; Fri, 7 Feb 2025 12:34:27 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 029C16B0093; Fri, 7 Feb 2025 12:34:26 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id E59406B0095; Fri, 7 Feb 2025 12:34:26 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from relay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0014.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.14]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C75B16B0085 for ; Fri, 7 Feb 2025 12:34:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin10.hostedemail.com (a10.router.float.18 [10.200.18.1]) by unirelay01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6970A1C9DE8 for ; Fri, 7 Feb 2025 17:34:26 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 83093847732.10.383062F Received: from mail-qt1-f177.google.com (mail-qt1-f177.google.com [209.85.160.177]) by imf01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9CC6140006 for ; Fri, 7 Feb 2025 17:34:24 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: imf01.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=google.com header.s=20230601 header.b=yeJM6FSM; spf=pass (imf01.hostedemail.com: domain of jackmanb@google.com designates 209.85.160.177 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=jackmanb@google.com; dmarc=pass (policy=reject) header.from=google.com ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-20220608; d=hostedemail.com; t=1738949664; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=x/hY6MCykKLr3N11/9asTXP8341eCnoeiaVTB+Wsi9BeaBryZiq7HOwzIdQqUIVteFoMRz 2qSivWzgm2w03icPX50z5Z8UK34KbqqlPkCdDiY/J0D3E3ViQ5BzcZQf3FCVgRRNFT/BqI 6+8yCOqQD3u2tLkgOflDRItlX3zzawM= ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; imf01.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=google.com header.s=20230601 header.b=yeJM6FSM; spf=pass (imf01.hostedemail.com: domain of jackmanb@google.com designates 209.85.160.177 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=jackmanb@google.com; dmarc=pass (policy=reject) header.from=google.com ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=hostedemail.com; s=arc-20220608; t=1738949664; h=from:from:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=wQE/r9oYQJeUmSQWFL/fUSETW6FOuhLgjtJx4q8CYEk=; b=Fy0nrf5EkQAOuE/DfmYDq+lfDAwc2geKSCxZuy9S8SycSkM9lpOVcMXGVDiHKjX7pI0Vo6 cKE0eqBVlC+g2OC8QH9DWDrWBhUs5pfbnQEe9twWSsi+M8BZelfdJLUI/4OTWrn9GpPVn6 DzpUw8EgQ9mGBoF+sDRd7qweFv7b/8c= Received: by mail-qt1-f177.google.com with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-467abce2ef9so421cf.0 for ; Fri, 07 Feb 2025 09:34:24 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20230601; t=1738949664; x=1739554464; darn=kvack.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=wQE/r9oYQJeUmSQWFL/fUSETW6FOuhLgjtJx4q8CYEk=; b=yeJM6FSM4c9VsvcFUPMjPMjy2D26gQDjRch89kFJBoAItv5nQPPTBfLeMYpZTdaQ8c XpSeo0uLlEfyUIAWGUukCIJh7l66/M8Jxj344T5HAmryxRkH7Nrx9GO6bM8LouxWdFqW ZZu/pTQzs6ChHNPhwC9Vnmjrf1OCxxip4HjM3JKSsG4rPrJADqupgGXizrO7tL/vcmf/ lteqDnx/OKmpnewK6YpGmc6SAvO5b6oZsSf1P3otdg8rkD8DA+mJrPh1rM3+0OzOG6FF ieoHe5oQIZpdhosFBTuWPDfFeQO+mv3wdnHUtBS5BuN30tvH/qotBLEN3v64fuOmz7wF a1XA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1738949664; x=1739554464; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=wQE/r9oYQJeUmSQWFL/fUSETW6FOuhLgjtJx4q8CYEk=; b=Pm6ucnRmimTofoF8zLP2zwYJ787xV4RzWM7JohCOwVNbj6c9IZheM1N9LrOWS2AleD bDXgm1LrhO1OPMXibtexdYreiJYUFN/ZPhbOpNmn4lg79oy/xbHnIXBplikdSpQCbBo9 dXrXVImRRkXFDs2HszSTWHN9bMLuFDWLoBpAgMVAsaCLWMsEet6xmJkUp9+Q0i6pxUns jyPRcYibgsi4rmYLjwflc6ninly0bP8X2LYmI4tlZyfzP+sCOyYDbGcmXK7/QjBTv1h5 jrEqK+acPLc9WQKLETfa1ugoB98moib5VOmegMAPQFKZyf1ICm+sDbSbiEUbKFngLU9A VTVw== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCW2699G6l4PgFMHFCKo3S/AwdN6NK5f7+IrZRETlFxZkCON0cyKx1U2oZMH4gusmImKTklRCrwY7A==@kvack.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxB6NztW3gRNeWnUyKaftuMjBIWRSZZ6OP33NB7dy3mTzYiQXk3 xUcxVzP+xMAu0kUWHC+JoYhzVN8CWpFInSVgexRW74zzC2Ysu41HzcVVXQHFBCYgKfvr9YPP/Nw RhTQZUn9hbYu1siwRR6OYM5xzF2jCY58YDHoV X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncuYtdcxRRrqi5JbWhg2FuwByTdXHXfdgatrcTqbrs02MxL6rFguW5U4ndd/54H GQWgpygFaK8HGftWaIstt0KEO9Lcy0fZJwv0BZc6c7oMvZwXeHLnjhcik9RnRfk844mTrs6Ulcm SIImnZ+rxZwsQtmZUlOwQdPAiPnpc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGP5xByBnMnsz1fxipvvMqkn0zzoEHD6jB1AzohT/QYEtRmmMdQi5qgtDbA3s87t+kZfrKGdzCQXcuR9RomnvU= X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:5a05:b0:463:95e2:71f8 with SMTP id d75a77b69052e-47169c92487mr4136691cf.15.1738949663503; Fri, 07 Feb 2025 09:34:23 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20250206044346.3810242-1-riel@surriel.com> <20250206044346.3810242-5-riel@surriel.com> In-Reply-To: From: Brendan Jackman Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2025 18:34:11 +0100 X-Gm-Features: AWEUYZnHHj4McI-lzpCIOVXfXTGju6fU2JsdGSb5pzfNxaB1ZLb4jDphduY0gKc Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 04/12] x86/mm: get INVLPGB count max from CPUID To: Rik van Riel Cc: x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, bp@alien8.de, peterz@infradead.org, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, zhengqi.arch@bytedance.com, nadav.amit@gmail.com, thomas.lendacky@amd.com, kernel-team@meta.com, linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, jannh@google.com, mhklinux@outlook.com, andrew.cooper3@citrix.com, Manali Shukla Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Stat-Signature: 8gzt8zzncsxr4spae8qdcmhg6axmypet X-Rspamd-Server: rspam06 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 9CC6140006 X-Rspam-User: X-HE-Tag: 1738949664-393898 X-HE-Meta: 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 9HDO9NYf wW8pHyFkC0lTFTcK74kzt98VoZ/UTInEapfb6BXknwvLNMBje/2pNzWIoSbPyXJD4JnZywEkQB5voJD3r7zPRjwmbhKudC1P8h4k+xcB1NGg44V5zlVr/GBkBqF2xgeOpfvCy95zhJibFwtbbUvx/KZWXmYNTzdKOCoXRAaMOSITQLpo9o5wIPcl8FEnb8aX3iyRsqQGW36Vrq+WFH7ToUALvxc4o31dUtkEmRMQlD4XO4BV8yTEqyvdODbpsPUSVtYxmkmhKA19aKQSxB2BgCgjvX/fiur6oDSyXhfY+9Z5hBFRb7w3wRcAfex3I18aiA0yecCEed52yQUzknK57v8xGsEKRs+ka7LYaHOhHUlwgF60mxjFzkZ9RfQ== X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000005, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Oh, sorry On Fri, 7 Feb 2025 at 16:10, Brendan Jackman wrote: > > On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 at 05:45, Rik van Riel wrote: > > diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h > > index 17b6590748c0..f9b832e971c5 100644 > > --- a/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h > > +++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeatures.h > > @@ -338,6 +338,7 @@ > > #define X86_FEATURE_CLZERO (13*32+ 0) /* "clzero" CLZERO instruction */ > > #define X86_FEATURE_IRPERF (13*32+ 1) /* "irperf" Instructions Retired Count */ > > #define X86_FEATURE_XSAVEERPTR (13*32+ 2) /* "xsaveerptr" Always save/restore FP error pointers */ > > +#define X86_FEATURE_INVLPGB (13*32+ 3) /* INVLPGB and TLBSYNC instruction supported. */ > > Why no "invlpgb" here? Seems like having this flag visible in cpuinfo > would be worthwhile. > > If there's a reason to hide it maybe add a comment to explain the > reason? Sorry if this is a stupid question - I also can't see an > obvious rationale for why existing flags do or don't get a name at > runtime. Oh, found it: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20250102120450.GNZ3aA4oVPnoJYRVUL@fat_crate.local/ Sorry for the noise, please ignore.