[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] x86/Intel: Sapphire Rapids Xeons also support PPIN
On 27.01.2022 00:01, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 20/01/2022 14:16, Jan Beulich wrote: >> This is as per Linux commit a331f5fdd36d ("x86/mce: Add Xeon Sapphire >> Rapids to list of CPUs that support PPIN") just in case a subsequent >> change making use of the respective new CPUID bit doesn't cover this >> model. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx> > > Sadly, > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip.git/commit/?h=x86/urgent&id=e464121f2d40eabc7d11823fb26db807ce945df4 > > > IceLake-D too. > > Preferably with this fixed, Acked-by: Andrew Cooper > <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> (to save a trivial repost), Sure, added. And thanks. > but ... > >> --- >> It is unclear to me whether this change is actually made obsolete by the >> subsequent one adding support for the respective new CPUID bit. > > ... Sapphire Rapids doesn't enumerate PPIN. Hopefully Granite Rapids > will, but everything SPR and older will have to rely on model checks only. At least in theory I suppose they could address this by as simple as a microcode update? >> It also continues to be unclear for which CPU models, if any, the >> PPIN_CAP bit in PLATFORM_INFO could be used in favor of a model check. > > Presumably none, because you need the same set of model checks to > interpret the PPIN bit in PLATFORM_INFO. It does beg the question what > the point of the bit is... Well, if the bit never had a different meaning, then a model check wouldn't be necessary. Just like e.g. probe_cpuid_faulting() doesn't have one. Jan
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |