[MODERATED] Re: [PATCH 2/3] V5 more sampling fun 2

On Tue, Apr 07, 2020 at 05:17:44PM +0200, speck for Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> Mark,
> 
> speck for mark gross <[email protected]> writes:
> > +
> > +static bool __init cpu_matches(unsigned long which, const struct x86_cpu_id *table)
> >  {
> > -	const struct x86_cpu_id *m = x86_match_cpu(cpu_vuln_whitelist);
> > +	const struct x86_cpu_id *m = x86_match_cpu(table);
> 
> Can this and the fixup of the caller please be in a separate patch?

Sure but, as a stand alown patch (outside the context of the srbds changes)
making the x86_cpu_id pased by pointer instead of a hard coded global is a bit
un-motivated.  Is it ok of I keep it as part of the SRBDS patchset and not
post it separately to lkml?

--mark