Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 8 Nov 2022 10:42:15 +0100 | From | Borislav Petkov <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] x86/cpu: Start documenting what the X86_FEATURE_ flag testing macros do |
| |
On Mon, Nov 07, 2022 at 02:13:52PM -0800, Dave Hansen wrote: > It seems to be mildly warning against using _static_cpu_has() > indiscriminately. Should we tone that down a bit if we're recommending > implicit use of static_cpu_has() via cpu_feature_enabled() everywhere?
Yeah, that comment is mine AFAIR. I was thinking of simply removing it as part of a long-term effort of converting everything to cpu_feature_enabled() and hiding static_cpu_has() eventually...
> I was also thinking that some longer-form stuff in Documentation/ might > be a good idea, along with some examples. I'd be happy to follow this > up with another patch that added Documentation/ like:
The problem with this is, it'll go out of sync with the code. So how about we make this a kernel-doc thing so that it gets updated in parallel?
Also look at Documentation/x86/cpuinfo.rst
It basically has most of what you wanna add.
:-)
-- Regards/Gruss, Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette
| |