Re: [Patch v2] x86/cpu: Add Ice Lake NNPI to Intel family

[Andy Shevchenko]

On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 07:51:26AM -0700, Dave Hansen wrote:
> On 6/12/19 2:52 AM, Andy Shevchenko wrote:
> >>  #define INTEL_FAM6_ICELAKE_MOBILE	0x7E
> >> +#define INTEL_FAM6_ICELAKE_NNPI		0x9D
> > What "I" stands for?
> > 
> > For me sounds like it's redundant here or something like NNP_DLI would be
> > better (because somewhere we have _NP as for Network Processor).
> 
> Let's not bikeshed this too much.  These things aren't used that widely
> and mostly they're just used for figuring out the processor generation.
>  It's exceedingly rare to have something like:
> 
> 
> 	if (model == INTEL_FAM6_ICELAKE_MOBILE)
> 		foo();
> 	else if (model == INTEL_FAM6_ICELAKE_NNPI)
> 		bar();
> 
> where what you suggest would matter.
> 
> Preserving the ability to google "ice lake nnpi" is pretty important, so
> preserving the Intel name makes a lot of sense here when possible.

What I'm talking is a consistency among suffixes. If there is a real
abbreviation (NNPI) which anybody can google, I'm totally for it to be used.

> Do we *HAVE* an Ice Lake network processor?

Not Ice Lake, something else.

-- 
With Best Regards,
Andy Shevchenko