On 16.07.2025 19:31, Andrew Cooper wrote: > mwait-idle's ICPU() is the most convenient place to get started. Introduce > X86_MATCH_CPU() and X86_MATCH_VFM() following their Linux counterparts. > > This involves match-cpu.h including more headers, which in turn allows us to > drop a few.
intel-cpu.h doesn't really need to move, does it? Conceivably there can be users of match-cpu.h which don't need the Intel constants. Hence no point in forcing them to see those. > No functional change. > > Signed-off-by: Andrew Cooper <andrew.coop...@citrix.com> > --- > CC: Jan Beulich <jbeul...@suse.com> > CC: Roger Pau Monné <roger....@citrix.com> > > We now have X86_FEATURE_ANY and X86_FEATURE_ALWAYS as aliases of LM. Given > the contexts they're used in, I've left the naming as-is. What's wrong with sticking to ALWAYS, which we already have? > It's a bit nasty (preprocessing wise) triple-expanding VFM in X86_MATCH_VFM(), > but we need an Integer Constant Expression. Not sure what alternative you're alluding to, or in fact what nastiness you're seeing. But maybe I'm getting "triple-expanding" wrong: To me that means going through three layers of expansion, when you may mean the fact that X86_MATCH_VFM() evaluates its parameter three times. If so - yes, but as you say: What do you do (in this case). Jan
