Yes, this demonstrates my point. Each of these is a single-bit boolean
value that takes up a single bit -- either on or off. But here you have
three values -- NO_DRM, RELAXED, and STRICT, that take up two bits. If
Is this fine to you?
#define _XEN_DOMCTL_DEV_NO_RDM 0
#define XEN_DOMCTL_DEV_NO_RDM (1U<<_XEN_DOMCTL_DEV_NO_RDM)
#define _XEN_DOMCTL_DEV_RDM_RELAXED 1
#define XEN_DOMCTL_DEV_RDM_RELAXED (1U<<_XEN_DOMCTL_DEV_RDM_RELAXED)
#define _XEN_DOMCTL_DEV_RDM_STRICT 2
#define XEN_DOMCTL_DEV_RDM_STRICT (1U<<_XEN_DOMCTL_DEV_RDM_STRICT)
AIUI these aren't individual flags, but kind of an enumeration. I.e.
you should keep the original definitions and add - as suggested by
George - a mask (two bits wide right now).
Okay but George also thought NO_RDM may be pointless since we can just
ignore this flag field simply for DT device, and he also thought one bit
may be fine enough to cover two cases, strict and relaxed. So maybe
finally, here is,
#define XEN_DOMCTL_DEV_RDM_RELAXED 1
#define XEN_DOMCTL_DEV_RDM_FLAGS_MASK (0x1)
Thanks
Tiejun
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
