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

Reply via email to