The marketing name is 'Xeon Processor Scalable Family'
Intel Xeon Bronze 3XXX processor
Intel Xeon Gold 6XXF processor
Intel Xeon Platinum 6XXF processor
Intel Xeon Platinum 8XXF processor
Intel Xeon Silver 4XXX processor
Intel Xeon Gold 5XXX processor
Intel Xeon Platinum 6XXX processor
Intel Xeon Platinum 8XXX processor
Intel Xeon processor E Family
Intel Xeon processor W Family
Intel Core X-Series Processor Family i7 78xx and i9-79xx Series
With there also being '2nd Generation Intel Xeon Scalable Processors' and
'3rd Generation Intel Xeon Scalable Processors'.
Intel documents contain statements like "The new Intel Xeon W processors
are based on the Intel Xeon Scalable processor".
Xeon W-32xx/W-22xx are from marketing point of view 2nd generation already.
The only difference between W-21xx and W-22xx as I see it here
is revision change from 0x4 to 0x7 on related chips.
So I think it should be 'SP' and 'SP 2G' much like the way 'E5' is used.
E5 and E3, E7 were well known names. Your SP and SP 2G are completely new
and it would be still OK to use them in defines, but IMHO not OK to use
them in
the actual dmesg. Since current marketing output provided by Intel is
complete chaos,
I understand why others are rather using code names than marketing names
or even
abbreviation of long marketing names.
