On Mon, May 18, 2026 at 03:17:15PM -0700, Sohil Mehta wrote:
> Changes in v3:
> - Remove the notice announcing the F00F bug workaround instead of
> simplifying it.
> - Pick up review tags from Ahmed.
>
> v2: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20260515002500.2463393-1-sohil.mehta@intel.com/
>
> Summary:
> The series fixes a harmless "alternatives_patched" warning that affects
> the original Pentium (Family 5) processors with SMP. It also removes the
> kernel announcement that the F00F bug workaround is in place. Mainly,
> the patches simplify and reduce lines of code.
>
> Original v1 post by Richard Weinberger:
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20260216104343.3625292-1-richard@nod.at/
>
> The Fixes tag in patch 1 isn't strictly necessary. I left it inplace as
> Richard had it in his original series, but it can be removed to avoid
> backporting hassles.
>
> Richard Weinberger (2):
> x86/cpu/intel: Don't clear X86_BUG_F00F before setting it
> x86/cpufeature: Remove clear_cpu_bug()
>
> Sohil Mehta (1):
> x86/cpu/intel: Remove the F00F bug workaround notice
>
> arch/x86/include/asm/cpufeature.h | 1 -
> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel.c | 15 +++------------
> 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)
Why are there three patches doing one logical thing?
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
https://people.kernel.org/tglx/notes-about-netiquette