On 28/06/16 16:33, Catalin Marinas wrote:
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 12:12:36PM +0100, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote:+#define CPUINFO_ATTR_RO(_name) \ + static ssize_t show_##_name(struct device *dev, \ + struct device_attribute *attr, char *buf) \ + { \ + struct cpuinfo_arm64 *info = &per_cpu(cpu_data, dev->id); \ + \ + if (info->reg_midr) \ + return sprintf(buf, "0x%016x\n", info->reg_##_name); \ + else \ + return 0; \ + } \ + static DEVICE_ATTR(_name, 0444, show_##_name, NULL) + +CPUINFO_ATTR_RO(midr); +CPUINFO_ATTR_RO(revidr);Since exposing these values is aimed at JIT code (and not human readable), wouldn't it make more sense to present the binary value instead of the ascii transformation?
I am fine with either. Edward, Do you have any preference ? Suzuki

