Re: [PATCH] platform/x86: handle Intel CPUs falsely reporting as GenuineIotel

[Christian Ludloff]

On Sat, Jul 4, 2026 at 11:46 AM Evalyn Goemer <git@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Saturday, July 4, 2026 4:22:40 AM Eastern Daylight Time Christian Ludloff wrote:
> > > https://github.com/InstLatx64/InstLatx64/blob/master/GenuineIotel/GenuineIotel00306C3_Haswell_CPUID5.txt
> > The InstLatx64 dump remains the *sole* full ("canonical") report.
> > The additional two known *partial* reports (SNB and IVB) are here:
> > https://web.archive.org/web/20251105144105/https://valid.x86.fr/kjm24i
> > https://web.archive.org/web/20250221003721/https://valid.x86.fr/5f6gzf
> > It is possible that the reports were tampered with by humans.
> parroted around in many places

Yes, cited often... but they all trace back to that single HSW dump.

Beyond that one, there are those sole SNB and IVB reports... but
those lack details... and the same single bit flip on 3 uarch gens...
is rather unusual... and I've seen quite a few things in my x86 life.

Overall, it's an outlier, and I'd flag such systems, not placate them.

--

Fwiw, I also question the existence of "AMDisbetter!", reported for
early AMD K5 samples – I have FMS=500h parts, and they report
the "AuthenticAMD" string, as expected. If anyone got proof to the
contrary, let's see it please.  :-)

--
C.