On Mon, 2021-10-04 at 21:03 +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote: > On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 01:31:20PM +0200, Iwona Winiarska wrote: > > Baseboard management controllers (BMC) often run Linux but are usually > > implemented with non-X86 processors. They can use PECI to access package > > config space (PCS) registers on the host CPU and since some information, > > e.g. figuring out the core count, can be obtained using different > > registers on different CPU generations, they need to decode the family > > and model. > > > > Move the data from arch/x86/include/asm/intel-family.h into a new file > > include/linux/x86/intel-family.h so that it can be used by other > > architectures. > > > > Signed-off-by: Iwona Winiarska <iwona.winiarska@xxxxxxxxx> > > Reviewed-by: Tony Luck <tony.luck@xxxxxxxxx> > > Reviewed-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@xxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > To limit tree-wide changes and help people that were expecting > > intel-family defines in arch/x86 to find it more easily without going > > through git history, we're not removing the original header > > completely, we're keeping it as a "stub" that includes the new one. > > If there is a consensus that the tree-wide option is better, > > we can choose this approach. > > Why can't the linux/ namespace header include the x86 one so that > nothing changes for arch/x86/? Same reason why PECI can't just include arch/x86 directly (we're building for ARM, not x86). > And if it is really only a handful of families you need, you might just > as well copy them into the peci headers and slap a comment above it > saying where they come from and save yourself all that churn... It's a handful of families for now - but I do expect the list to grow once new platforms are introduced (and with that - duplicates have to be added in both places). Since the churn is relatively low I wanted to start with trying to keep things clean first. If you're against that - sure, we can duplicate. Thanks -Iwona
