On 03/05/2019 16:56, Andrii Anisov wrote:
Hello Julien,
On 22.04.19 19:49, Julien Grall wrote:
The newly introduced macro _BITUL makes the code more readable.
Signed-off-by: Julien Grall <julien.gr...@arm.com>
---
xen/include/asm-arm/processor.h | 18 +++++++++---------
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/xen/include/asm-arm/processor.h b/xen/include/asm-arm/processor.h
index c6f56490b3..1a143fb6a3 100644
--- a/xen/include/asm-arm/processor.h
+++ b/xen/include/asm-arm/processor.h
@@ -115,20 +115,20 @@
/* Bits specific to SCTLR_EL1 for Arm32 */
-#define SCTLR_A32_EL1_V (_AC(1,U)<<13)
+#define SCTLR_A32_EL1_V _BITUL(13)
/* Common bits for SCTLR_ELx for Arm32 */
-#define SCTLR_A32_ELx_TE (_AC(1,U)<<30)
-#define SCTLR_A32_ELx_FI (_AC(1,U)<<21)
+#define SCTLR_A32_ELx_TE _BITUL(30)
+#define SCTLR_A32_ELx_FI _BITUL(21)
/* Common bits for SCTLR_ELx on all architectures */
-#define SCTLR_Axx_ELx_EE (_AC(1,U)<<25)
-#define SCTLR_Axx_ELx_WXN (_AC(1,U)<<19)
-#define SCTLR_Axx_ELx_I (_AC(1,U)<<12)
-#define SCTLR_Axx_ELx_C (_AC(1,U)<<2)
-#define SCTLR_Axx_ELx_A (_AC(1,U)<<1)
-#define SCTLR_Axx_ELx_M (_AC(1,U)<<0)
+#define SCTLR_Axx_ELx_EE _BITUL(25)
+#define SCTLR_Axx_ELx_WXN _BITUL(19)
+#define SCTLR_Axx_ELx_I _BITUL(12)
+#define SCTLR_Axx_ELx_C _BITUL(2)
+#define SCTLR_Axx_ELx_A _BITUL(1)
+#define SCTLR_Axx_ELx_M _BITUL(0)
#define HSCTLR_BASE _AC(0x30c51878,U)
Resolution of the dispute with Jan about [PATCH 01/20] is required first.
I don't understand what is your "second". Does it mean you are happy with the
idea of the patch but we should agree on the naming first?
Cheers,
--
Julien Grall
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
