[PATCH] fhandler/proc.cc(format_proc_cpuinfo): Add Linux 6.3 cpuinfo
Corinna Vinschen
corinna-cygwin@cygwin.com
Mon Jun 5 16:55:17 GMT 2023
On May 12 16:36, Jon Turney wrote:
> On 08/05/2023 04:12, Brian Inglis wrote:
> > cpuid 0x00000007:0 ecx:7 shstk Shadow Stack support & Windows [20]20H1/[20]2004+
> > => user_shstk User mode program Shadow Stack support
> > AMD SVM 0x8000000a:0 edx:25 vnmi virtual Non-Maskable Interrrupts
> > Sync AMD 0x80000008:0 ebx flags across two output locations
>
> Thanks. I applied this.
>
> Does this need applying to the 3.4 branch as well?
>
> > ---
> > winsup/cygwin/fhandler/proc.cc | 29 ++++++++++++++++++++++-------
>
> > + /* cpuid 0x00000007 ecx & Windows [20]20H1/[20]2004+ */
> > + if (maxf >= 0x00000007 && wincap.osname () >= "10.0"
> > + && wincap.build_number () >= 19041)
No problems checking for the OS versions, but not like this.
wincap.osname () >= "10.0" ?
That will not do what you expect it to do. wincap.osname() is a char *
and the >= operator will not work as on cstring in C++, but compare the
pointer values of the two strings instead.
While changing this to
strcmp (wincap.osname (), "10.0") >= 0
is possible, it doesn't make sense. For all supported Windows versions,
the build number is unambiguously bumped with each new release. So
there's no older OS version with a build number >= 19041. As a result,
the check for osname() can simply go away.
But then again, this is a windows feature which would best served by
adding a bit flag to the wincaps array, *and* we already have a wincaps
array for windows versions starting with build number 19041
(wincap_10_2004).
So, Brian, would you mind to create a followup patch which rather defines
a new bitflag in the wincaps array, set it to false or true according
to the OS version, and check this flag instead?
Thanks,
Corinna
More information about the Cygwin-patches
mailing list