Re: [PATCH v1 2/2] x86/cpuid: Fix a few more typos

[Maciej Wieczor-Retman]

On 2026-06-03 at 14:38:09 +0200, Ahmed S. Darwish wrote:
>Hi Maciej,
>
>On Wed, 03 Jun 2026, Maciej Wieczor-Retman wrote:
>>
>> From: Ahmed S. Darwish <darwi@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>
>Yes, this is the the CI output from x86-cpuid-db,¹ but I did not author
>this patch.  Please keep the From lines as yours, since x86-cpuid-db
>already has a git history with all the authorship details.

Okay, I'll switch it to my authorship. I was going for mirroring what the
x86-cpuid-db commit history has.

>Also, could we please make the logs of the patches modifying these
>auto-generated files consistent with previous patches?  Please check:
>
>  49394b5af45c tools/x86/kcpuid: Update bitfields to x86-cpuid-db v2.4
>  300ba891418a tools/x86/kcpuid: Update bitfields to x86-cpuid-db v2.3
>  5e0c3c5e95f0 tools/x86/kcpuid: Update bitfields to x86-cpuid-db v2.2
>  ...
>
>So this series should IMHO be just two patches instead:
>
>  From: you
>
>  patch #1: tools/x86/kcpuid: Update bitfields to x86-cpuid-db v3.1
>  patch #2: x86/cpuid: <leaf_types.h>: Update bitfields to x86-cpuid-db v3.1
>
>And in both of these two patches you summarize the release changes relevant
>to the modified files and add a link to the v3.1 release Changelog:
>
>  https://gitlab.com/x86-cpuid.org/x86-cpuid-db/-/blob/v3.1/CHANGELOG.rst
>
>I was confused actually what the first patch was doing, given the existence
>of the second.  With the above format, the git history of these auto
>generated files will be much cleaner.
>
>¹ https://msgid.link/ah8-uSSdb1KcLByV@lx-t490
>
>Thanks!
>Ahmed

Sure, I'll reformat the patches and resend soon.

-- 
Kind regards
Maciej Wieczór-Retman