On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 10:30 PM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Andy Shevchenko <andy.shevchenko@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 3:18 PM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL_FEATURE(INTEL, 6, 9, X86_FEATURE_EST, NULL), > >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL_FEATURE(INTEL, 6, 13, X86_FEATURE_EST, NULL), > >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL_FEATURE(INTEL, 15, 3, X86_FEATURE_EST, NULL), > >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL_FEATURE(INTEL, 15, 4, X86_FEATURE_EST, NULL), > > > >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL(INTEL, 6, 0x8, 0), > >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL(INTEL, 6, 0xb, 0), > >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL(INTEL, 15, 0x2, 0), > > > >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL(INTEL, 6, 0x8, 0), > >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL(INTEL, 6, 0xb, 0), > >> + X86_MATCH_VENDOR_FAM_MODEL(INTEL, 15, 0x2, 0), > > > > Perhaps use names instead of 6 and 15? > > Thought about that and did not come up with anyting useful. FAM6 vs. 6 > is not really any better Hmm... Do we have family 15 for Intel? Perhaps I missed something... Or is it for any family? -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko
