* H. Peter Anvin <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Zhang, Austin wrote: >>>> new x86 feature bits should definitely show up in the x86 tree too >> So can we add sse4.1 into this patch also as: #define >> X86_FEATURE_XMM4_1 (4*32+19) >> even though now no obvious user is asking it in kernel. > > The best would be to: > > 1. rename all the feature bits which have inconsistent names in their > #defines and in /proc/cpuinfo; > 2. generate the /proc/cpuinfo table > (arch/x86/kernel/cpu/feature_names.c) automatically from > cpufeature.h. > > 2. is quite trivial, and 1. can be done largely automatically. I will > experiment with this. i see you committed that into tip/x86/cpu - i just integrated that into tip/master and pushed out the result. This way starting at v2.6.28 we'll have only a single, non-redundant definition for CPU feature information, from which we auto-generate the rest. Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-next" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
