From owner-svn-src-all@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jun 20 14:41:32 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E64DA815; Fri, 20 Jun 2014 14:41:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vps1.elischer.org (vps1.elischer.org [204.109.63.16]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "vps1.elischer.org", Issuer "CA Cert Signing Authority" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AF10B285E; Fri, 20 Jun 2014 14:41:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from Julian-MBP3.local (etroy.elischer.org [121.45.232.70]) (authenticated bits=0) by vps1.elischer.org (8.14.8/8.14.8) with ESMTP id s5KEfNvL079686 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Fri, 20 Jun 2014 07:41:27 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from julian@freebsd.org) Message-ID: <53A4480D.2040803@freebsd.org> Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 22:41:17 +0800 From: Julian Elischer User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: attilio@FreeBSD.org, Konstantin Belousov Subject: Re: svn commit: r267651 - in head: share/man/man4 sys/dev/cpuctl sys/sys usr.sbin/cpucontrol References: <201406192154.s5JLsfed074305@svn.freebsd.org> <20140620040801.GA3991@kib.kiev.ua> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "svn-src-head@freebsd.org" , "svn-src-all@freebsd.org" , "src-committers@freebsd.org" X-BeenThere: svn-src-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: "SVN commit messages for the entire src tree \(except for " user" and " projects" \)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2014 14:41:32 -0000 On 6/20/14, 2:12 PM, Attilio Rao wrote: > On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 6:08 AM, Konstantin Belousov > wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 19, 2014 at 09:54:41PM +0000, Attilio Rao wrote: >>> Author: attilio >>> Date: Thu Jun 19 21:54:41 2014 >>> New Revision: 267651 >>> URL: http://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/267651 >>> >>> Log: >>> Following comments in r242565 add the possibility to specify ecx when >>> performing cpuid calls. >>> Add also a new way to specify the level type to cpucontrol(8) as >>> reported in the manpage. >>> >>> Sponsored by: EMC / Isilon storage division >>> Reviewed by: bdrewery, gcooper >>> Testerd by: bdrewery >>> Modified: head/sys/sys/cpuctl.h >>> ============================================================================== >>> --- head/sys/sys/cpuctl.h Thu Jun 19 21:05:07 2014 (r267650) >>> +++ head/sys/sys/cpuctl.h Thu Jun 19 21:54:41 2014 (r267651) >>> @@ -35,7 +35,8 @@ typedef struct { >>> } cpuctl_msr_args_t; >>> >>> typedef struct { >>> - int level; /* CPUID level */ >>> + int level; /* CPUID level */ >>> + int level_type; /* CPUID level type */ >>> uint32_t data[4]; >>> } cpuctl_cpuid_args_t; >>> >>> @@ -50,5 +51,6 @@ typedef struct { >>> #define CPUCTL_UPDATE _IOWR('c', 4, cpuctl_update_args_t) >>> #define CPUCTL_MSRSBIT _IOWR('c', 5, cpuctl_msr_args_t) >>> #define CPUCTL_MSRCBIT _IOWR('c', 6, cpuctl_msr_args_t) >>> +#define CPUCTL_CPUID_COUNT _IOWR('c', 7, cpuctl_cpuid_args_t) >>> >>> #endif /* _CPUCTL_H_ */ >> The cpuctl(4) is used by third-party code, and this change breaks its >> ABI. The numeric value for CPUCTL_CPUID is changed, which means that >> old binaries call non-existing ioctl now. This is at least a visible >> breakage, since the argument for the ioctl changed the layout as well. >> >> The following patch restored the CPUCTL_CPUID for me. I considered >> naming its argument differently, instead of renaming the argument >> of CPUCTL_CPUID_COUNT (which you tried to do ?), but decided not, >> to preserve the API as well. > No, breaking the ABI is fine for -CURRENT so I don't see why we need the bloat. > I don't plan on MFC this patch. If I need to (or any user requests > that) I will do with the appropriate ABI-compliant way (ie. adding a > new argument like this one). breaking the ABI is not fine. we have backwards compatibility. If you break a user facing ABI you need to have a compatibility plan. A newer kernel should always do its best to run old binaries. > > Attilio > >