On Fri, 4 Jan 2013 18:02:33 -0200
Eduardo Habkost <ehabk...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 04, 2013 at 08:37:24PM +0100, Igor Mammedov wrote:
> > Make for() cycle reusable for the next patch
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Igor Mammedov <imamm...@redhat.com>
> > ---
> > v3:
> > fix/swap vendor2 and vendor3 order
> > Spotted-By: Eduardo Habkost <ehabk...@redhat.com>
> > v2:
> > place x86cpu_vendor_words2str() a bit earlier, before feature
> > arrays to avoid compile error when vendor property is converted
> > static property.
> > ---
> > target-i386/cpu.c | 21 ++++++++++++++-------
> > 1 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/target-i386/cpu.c b/target-i386/cpu.c
> > index d6e4e71..e26e631 100644
> > --- a/target-i386/cpu.c
> > +++ b/target-i386/cpu.c
> > @@ -45,6 +45,18 @@
> > #include "hw/apic_internal.h"
> > #endif
> >
> > +static void x86cpu_vendor_words2str(char *dst, uint32_t ebx, uint32_t ecx,
> > + uint32_t edx)
> > +{
> > + int i;
> > + for (i = 0; i < 4; i++) {
> > + dst[i] = ebx >> (8 * i);
> > + dst[i + 4] = ecx >> (8 * i);
> > + dst[i + 8] = edx >> (8 * i);
> > + }
> > + dst[CPUID_VENDOR_SZ] = '\0';
> > +}
>
> Now the code seems to work as expected, but the parameter names are
> misleading. String bytes 4-7 (vendor2) come from EDX on the CPUID
> instruction, and bytes 8-11 (vendor3) come from ECX. Look at the
> x86cpu_vendor_words2str() calls you added on patch 10/20.
Perhaps naming params like this would be better:
x86cpu_vendor_words2str(char *dst, uint32_t vendor1, uint32_t vendor2, uint32_t
vendor3)
>
[...]
> >
> > --
> > 1.7.1
> >
>
> --
> Eduardo
--
Regards,
Igor
