On 2/11/2025 1:09 PM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 2/11/25 11:44, Sohil Mehta wrote:
>> + if (c->x86_vendor == X86_VENDOR_INTEL &&
>> + ((c->x86_vfm >= INTEL_PENTIUM_PRO && c->x86_vfm <= INTEL_PENTIUM_M_DOTHAN) ||
>> + (c->x86_vfm >= INTEL_P4_WILLAMETTE && c->x86_vfm <= INTEL_P4_CEDARMILL))) {
>
> Since these are both closed checks and not open-ended, is the
>
> if (c->x86_vendor == X86_VENDOR_INTEL &&
>
> bit needed or superfluous?
>
You are right, since it is close ended on both sides we should be able
to remove the X86_VENDOR_INTEL.
I was thinking if we should leave it there to avoid confusion. But,
INTEL_* in the VFM string is a good enough hint that the checks are
Intel specific. Also, it's not like this check is going to be modified
frequently.
> Also, super nit, can you vertically align the two range checks, please?
>
> ((c->x86_vfm >= INTEL_PENTIUM_PRO && c->x86_vfm <=
> INTEL_PENTIUM_M_DOTHAN) ||
> (c->x86_vfm >= INTEL_P4_WILLAMETTE && c->x86_vfm <=
> INTEL_P4_CEDARMILL))) {
>
>
