On 05/02/2017 07:08 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Tue, May 02, 2017 at 12:39:13AM +0200, Heinrich Schuchardt wrote:
>> There is no need to hide the model name in processes
>> that are not PER_LINUX32.
>>
>> So let us always provide a model name that is easily readable.
>>
>> Fixes: e47b020a323d ("arm64: Provide "model name" in /proc/cpuinfo for
>> PER_LINUX32 tasks")
>> Signed-off-by: Heinrich Schuchardt <xypron.g...@gmx.de>
>> ---
>> arch/arm64/kernel/cpuinfo.c | 5 ++---
>> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpuinfo.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpuinfo.c
>> index b3d5b3e8fbcb..9ad9ddcd2f19 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpuinfo.c
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpuinfo.c
>> @@ -118,9 +118,8 @@ static int c_show(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
>> * "processor". Give glibc what it expects.
>> */
>> seq_printf(m, "processor\t: %d\n", i);
>> - if (compat)
>> - seq_printf(m, "model name\t: ARMv8 Processor rev %d
>> (%s)\n",
>> - MIDR_REVISION(midr), COMPAT_ELF_PLATFORM);
>> + seq_printf(m, "model name\t: ARMv8 Processor rev %d (%s)\n",
>> + MIDR_REVISION(midr), COMPAT_ELF_PLATFORM);
>>
>> seq_printf(m, "BogoMIPS\t: %lu.%02lu\n",
>> loops_per_jiffy / (500000UL/HZ),
>
> Such patch seems to come up regularly:
>
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9303311/
>
> (and it usually gets rejected)
Side note: I'm in the process of reviving a standardization discussion
around server and model information, and we'll be coming back with an
agenda to get this information in /proc/cpuinfo in coming months.
Jon.
