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