[PATCH v5 2/3] cpuid: Add a helper in scattered.c to return cpuid

2016-11-09 Thread He Chen
Some sparse CPUID leafs are gathered in a fake leaf to save size of
x86_capability array in current code, but sometimes, kernel or other
modules (e.g. KVM cpuid enumeration) may need actual hardware leaf
information.

This patch adds a helper get_scattered_cpuid_leaf() to rebuild actual
CPUID leaf, and it can be called outside by modules.

Signed-off-by: He Chen 
---
 arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h |  3 +++
 arch/x86/kernel/cpu/scattered.c  | 49 ++--
 2 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h b/arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h
index 8f6ac5b..e7f8c62 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h
@@ -189,6 +189,9 @@ extern void identify_secondary_cpu(struct cpuinfo_x86 *);
 extern void print_cpu_info(struct cpuinfo_x86 *);
 void print_cpu_msr(struct cpuinfo_x86 *);
 extern void init_scattered_cpuid_features(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c);
+extern u32 get_scattered_cpuid_leaf(unsigned int level,
+   unsigned int sub_leaf,
+   enum cpuid_regs_idx reg);
 extern unsigned int init_intel_cacheinfo(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c);
 extern void init_amd_cacheinfo(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c);
 
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/scattered.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/scattered.c
index 5dbdd0b..d1316f9 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/scattered.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/scattered.c
@@ -17,24 +17,25 @@ struct cpuid_bit {
u32 sub_leaf;
 };
 
+/* Please keep the leaf sorted by cpuid_bit.level for faster search. */
+static const struct cpuid_bit cpuid_bits[] = {
+   { X86_FEATURE_APERFMPERF,   CPUID_ECX,  0, 0x0006, 0 },
+   { X86_FEATURE_EPB,  CPUID_ECX,  3, 0x0006, 0 },
+   { X86_FEATURE_INTEL_PT, CPUID_EBX, 25, 0x0007, 0 },
+   { X86_FEATURE_AVX512_4VNNIW,CPUID_EDX,  2, 0x0007, 0 },
+   { X86_FEATURE_AVX512_4FMAPS,CPUID_EDX,  3, 0x0007, 0 },
+   { X86_FEATURE_HW_PSTATE,CPUID_EDX,  7, 0x8007, 0 },
+   { X86_FEATURE_CPB,  CPUID_EDX,  9, 0x8007, 0 },
+   { X86_FEATURE_PROC_FEEDBACK,CPUID_EDX, 11, 0x8007, 0 },
+   { 0, 0, 0, 0, 0 }
+};
+
 void init_scattered_cpuid_features(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
 {
u32 max_level;
u32 regs[4];
const struct cpuid_bit *cb;
 
-   static const struct cpuid_bit cpuid_bits[] = {
-   { X86_FEATURE_INTEL_PT, CPUID_EBX,25, 0x0007, 0 },
-   { X86_FEATURE_AVX512_4VNNIW,CPUID_EDX, 2, 0x0007, 0 },
-   { X86_FEATURE_AVX512_4FMAPS,CPUID_EDX, 3, 0x0007, 0 },
-   { X86_FEATURE_APERFMPERF,   CPUID_ECX, 0, 0x0006, 0 },
-   { X86_FEATURE_EPB,  CPUID_ECX, 3, 0x0006, 0 },
-   { X86_FEATURE_HW_PSTATE,CPUID_EDX, 7, 0x8007, 0 },
-   { X86_FEATURE_CPB,  CPUID_EDX, 9, 0x8007, 0 },
-   { X86_FEATURE_PROC_FEEDBACK,CPUID_EDX,11, 0x8007, 0 },
-   { 0, 0, 0, 0, 0 }
-   };
-
for (cb = cpuid_bits; cb->feature; cb++) {
 
/* Verify that the level is valid */
@@ -51,3 +52,27 @@ void init_scattered_cpuid_features(struct cpuinfo_x86 *c)
set_cpu_cap(c, cb->feature);
}
 }
+
+u32 get_scattered_cpuid_leaf(unsigned int level, unsigned int sub_leaf,
+enum cpuid_regs_idx reg)
+{
+   const struct cpuid_bit *cb;
+   u32 cpuid_val = 0;
+
+   for (cb = cpuid_bits; cb->feature; cb++) {
+
+   if (level > cb->level)
+   continue;
+
+   if (level < cb->level)
+   break;
+
+   if (reg == cb->reg && sub_leaf == cb->sub_leaf) {
+   if (cpu_has(&boot_cpu_data, cb->feature))
+   cpuid_val |= BIT(cb->bit);
+   }
+   }
+
+   return cpuid_val;
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(get_scattered_cpuid_leaf);
-- 
2.7.4



Re: [PATCH v5 2/3] cpuid: Add a helper in scattered.c to return cpuid

2016-11-10 Thread Borislav Petkov
On Wed, Nov 09, 2016 at 07:05:27PM +0800, He Chen wrote:
> Some sparse CPUID leafs are gathered in a fake leaf to save size of
> x86_capability array in current code, but sometimes, kernel or other
> modules (e.g. KVM cpuid enumeration) may need actual hardware leaf

s/cpuid/CPUID/

> information.
> 
> This patch adds a helper get_scattered_cpuid_leaf() to rebuild actual
> CPUID leaf, and it can be called outside by modules.
> 
> Signed-off-by: He Chen 

Modulo $Subject and typo above, the code looks ok to me:

Reviewed-by: Borislav Petkov 

-- 
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.

Good mailing practices for 400: avoid top-posting and trim the reply.