RE: [PATCH v16 2/5] x86/cpufeatures: Add X86_FEATURE_SGX_EUPDATESVN feature flag

[Reshetova, Elena]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Hansen, Dave <dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Friday, October 17, 2025 12:41 AM
> To: Reshetova, Elena <elena.reshetova@xxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: jarkko@xxxxxxxxxx; seanjc@xxxxxxxxxx; Huang, Kai
> <kai.huang@xxxxxxxxx>; mingo@xxxxxxxxxx; linux-sgx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-
> kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; x86@xxxxxxxxxx; Mallick, Asit K
> <asit.k.mallick@xxxxxxxxx>; Scarlata, Vincent R <vincent.r.scarlata@xxxxxxxxx>;
> Cai, Chong <chongc@xxxxxxxxxx>; Aktas, Erdem <erdemaktas@xxxxxxxxxx>;
> Annapurve, Vishal <vannapurve@xxxxxxxxxx>; Bondarevska, Nataliia
> <bondarn@xxxxxxxxxx>; Raynor, Scott <scott.raynor@xxxxxxxxx>; Dave Hansen
> <dave.hansen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v16 2/5] x86/cpufeatures: Add
> X86_FEATURE_SGX_EUPDATESVN feature flag
> 
> On 10/15/25 23:38, Reshetova, Elena wrote:
> > Sure, will do, thanks!
> > Previous version was based on x86_tip/master
> 
> Just FWIW, that means very little. During the merge window it should
> _mostly_ be gunk that's already gone up for -rc1. But it might also
> contain cruft that _didn't_ go up and needs another cycle.
> 
> Please just base things on a tag in Linus's tree unless you have an
> explicit, known, called-out-in-your-changelog dependency on something in
> tip.
> 
> tl;dr: Basing on tip/x86/master was a bug here, not a feature.

Thank you very much for explaining! I didn’t know how x86_tip is managed,
now it is clear also for future.  

And thank you for pulling the patches in!

Best Regards,
Elena.