On 2025-07-24 at 13:34:44 +0200, Greg KH wrote:
Your reply-to is messed up :(
On Thu, Jul 24, 2025 at 12:45:35PM +0200, Maciej Wieczor-Retman wrote:
If some config options are disabled during compile time, they still are enumerated in macros that use the x86_capability bitmask - cpu_has() or this_cpu_has().
The features are also visible in /proc/cpuinfo even though they are not enabled - which is contrary to what the documentation states about the file. Examples of such feature flags are lam, fred, sgx, ibrs_enhanced, split_lock_detect, user_shstk, avx_vnni and enqcmd.
Add a DISABLED_MASK_INITIALIZER macro that creates an initializer list filled with DISABLED_MASKx bitmasks.
Initialize the cpu_caps_cleared array with the autogenerated disabled bitmask.
Fixes: ea4e3bef4c94 ("Documentation/x86: Add documentation for /proc/cpuinfo feature flags") Reported-by: Farrah Chen farrah.chen@intel.com Signed-off-by: H. Peter Anvin (Intel) hpa@zytor.com Signed-off-by: Maciej Wieczor-Retman maciej.wieczor-retman@intel.com Cc: stable@vger.kernel.org
Resend:
- Fix macro name to match with the patch message.
That's a v4, not a RESEND.
Doesn't Intel have a "Here is how to submit a patch to the kernel" training program you have to go through?
confused,
greg k-h
The way I did it used to work for me previously, I'm not sure why it didn't this time.