From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752172AbaBVVTi (ORCPT ); Sat, 22 Feb 2014 16:19:38 -0500 Received: from terminus.zytor.com ([198.137.202.10]:43798 "EHLO mail.zytor.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750838AbaBVVTh (ORCPT ); Sat, 22 Feb 2014 16:19:37 -0500 User-Agent: K-9 Mail for Android In-Reply-To: <20140222210038.GA19867@thin> References: <296de15c8addece6dada4ddac982b3934d8ff6fa.1393096111.git.josh@joshtriplett.org> <4bdaeab748d3b51ef24576ca030b5eb80455aff8.1393098813.git.josh@joshtriplett.org> <20140222204936.GA2534@pd.tnic> <20140222210038.GA19867@thin> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] x86: Support compiling out human-friendly processor feature names From: "H. Peter Anvin" Date: Sat, 22 Feb 2014 13:18:14 -0800 To: Josh Triplett , Borislav Petkov CC: Andrew Morton , Andi Kleen , Feng Tang , Ingo Molnar , Jacob Shin , Jan Beulich , Jussi Kivilinna , "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Paul Gortmaker , Peter Zijlstra , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Rob Landley , Seiji Aguchi , Stephane Eranian , Suravee Suthikulpanit , Thomas Gleixner , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org Message-ID: <1b6550ce-40bd-4fc4-a3e4-37997da17973@email.android.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On February 22, 2014 1:00:39 PM PST, Josh Triplett wrote: >On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 09:49:36PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote: >> On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 11:57:10AM -0800, Josh Triplett wrote: >> > diff --git a/arch/x86/boot/cpu.c b/arch/x86/boot/cpu.c >> > index 6ec6bb6..29207f6 100644 >> > --- a/arch/x86/boot/cpu.c >> > +++ b/arch/x86/boot/cpu.c >> > @@ -16,7 +16,9 @@ >> > */ >> > >> > #include "boot.h" >> > +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_FEATURE_NAMES >> > #include "cpustr.h" >> > +#endif >> >> You probably could get rid of this ifdef too by moving it into >cpustr.h >> after teaching arch/x86/boot/mkcpustr.c to issue it... > >That would require building and running mkcpustr, which doesn't happen >when !CONFIG_X86_FEATURE_NAMES. (And it'd require adding ifdefs to >mkcpustr instead, which seems counterproductive.) > Didn't that change since v1? >However, in exploring this, I ran into some build issues with v2 on a >clean build; I'll send out v3 shortly with fixes to those. > >- Josh Triplett -- Sent from my mobile phone. Please pardon brevity and lack of formatting.