Re: [PATCH] x86: pat cpu feature bit setting for known cpus

[H. Peter Anvin]

Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Venki Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > > >  OK, note previous question: what is the motivation for having 
> > > >  this as a whitelist (as opposed to a blacklist)?
> > > Venkatesh could tell?
> > Main reason for white-list at this point is not to be side-tracked by 
> > real or potential erratas on older CPUs. Focussing on getting the 
> > support for this feature on current and future CPUs. If older CPUs 
> > have survived all these days without this feature, they should be 
> > doing OK.
>
> well, the upside would be that since most testing of Linux kernels is 
> done on _old_ hardware (people tend to risk their old hw first ;-), we'd 
> get faster convergence of the codebase, even though we have the risk of 
> erratas (known and unknown ones alike). Code that artificially limits 
> its utility is almost always slow to stabilize.

Yes, using a whitelist of this type is wrong, IMO, and smells faintly of 
vendor-lockin.

	-hpa
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/