From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: linuxppc64-dev@ozlabs.org
Cc: akpm@osdl.org, trini@kernel.crashing.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org,
paulus@samba.org, hpa@zytor.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PPC/PPC64: Abstract cpu_feature checks.
Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2005 12:57:34 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200502061257.40798.arnd@arndb.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050206032645.GA18845@austin.ibm.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 803 bytes --]
On Sünndag 06 Februar 2005 04:26, Olof Johansson wrote:
>
> Abstract most manual mask checks of cpu_features with cpu_has_feature()
>
Just to get back to the point of consistant naming: In case we do the
other proposed changes as well, is everyone happy with the following
function names?
cpu_has_feature(CPU_FTR_X) cur_cpu_spec->cpu_features & CPU_FTR_X
cpu_feature_possible(CPU_FTR_X) CPU_FTR_POSSIBLE_MASK & CPU_FTR_X
fw_has_feature(FW_FEATURE_X) cur_cpu_spec->fw_features & FW_FTR_X
platform_is(PLATFORM_X) systemcfg->platform == PLATFORM_X
platform_possible(PLATFORM_X) PLATFORM_POSSIBLE_MASK & PLATFORM_X
platform_compatible(PLATFORM_X) systemcfg->platform & PLATFORM_X
It's not as consistant as I'd like it to be, but it's the best I could
come up with.
Arnd <><
[-- Attachment #2: signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@arndb.de>
To: linuxppc64-dev@ozlabs.org
Cc: olof@austin.ibm.com (Olof Johansson),
linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
akpm@osdl.org, trini@kernel.crashing.org, paulus@samba.org,
anton@samba.org, hpa@zytor.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] PPC/PPC64: Abstract cpu_feature checks.
Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2005 12:57:34 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200502061257.40798.arnd@arndb.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050206032645.GA18845@austin.ibm.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 803 bytes --]
On Sünndag 06 Februar 2005 04:26, Olof Johansson wrote:
>
> Abstract most manual mask checks of cpu_features with cpu_has_feature()
>
Just to get back to the point of consistant naming: In case we do the
other proposed changes as well, is everyone happy with the following
function names?
cpu_has_feature(CPU_FTR_X) cur_cpu_spec->cpu_features & CPU_FTR_X
cpu_feature_possible(CPU_FTR_X) CPU_FTR_POSSIBLE_MASK & CPU_FTR_X
fw_has_feature(FW_FEATURE_X) cur_cpu_spec->fw_features & FW_FTR_X
platform_is(PLATFORM_X) systemcfg->platform == PLATFORM_X
platform_possible(PLATFORM_X) PLATFORM_POSSIBLE_MASK & PLATFORM_X
platform_compatible(PLATFORM_X) systemcfg->platform & PLATFORM_X
It's not as consistant as I'd like it to be, but it's the best I could
come up with.
Arnd <><
[-- Attachment #2: signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-02-06 11:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-02-04 7:22 [PATCH] PPC/PPC64: Introduce CPU_HAS_FEATURE() macro Olof Johansson
2005-02-04 7:22 ` Olof Johansson
2005-02-04 8:17 ` Pekka Enberg
2005-02-04 8:17 ` Pekka Enberg
2005-02-04 17:20 ` Olof Johansson
2005-02-04 17:20 ` Olof Johansson
2005-02-05 7:48 ` Pekka Enberg
2005-02-05 7:48 ` Pekka Enberg
2005-02-05 9:08 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2005-02-05 9:08 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2005-02-04 12:36 ` Arnd Bergmann
2005-02-04 12:36 ` Arnd Bergmann
2005-02-04 18:35 ` Olof Johansson
2005-02-04 18:35 ` Olof Johansson
2005-02-04 18:57 ` Arnd Bergmann
2005-02-04 18:57 ` Arnd Bergmann
2005-02-04 23:50 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2005-02-04 23:50 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2005-02-04 23:49 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2005-02-04 23:49 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2005-02-05 0:22 ` Arnd Bergmann
2005-02-05 0:22 ` Arnd Bergmann
2005-02-05 1:34 ` Anton Blanchard
2005-02-05 1:34 ` Anton Blanchard
2005-02-05 11:04 ` Arnd Bergmann
2005-02-05 11:04 ` Arnd Bergmann
2005-02-05 1:47 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2005-02-05 1:47 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2005-02-04 14:45 ` Tom Rini
2005-02-04 14:45 ` Tom Rini
2005-02-05 18:46 ` [PATCH] PPC/PPC64: Abstract cpu_feature checks Olof Johansson
2005-02-05 18:46 ` Olof Johansson
2005-02-06 3:26 ` Olof Johansson
2005-02-06 3:26 ` Olof Johansson
2005-02-06 11:57 ` Arnd Bergmann [this message]
2005-02-06 11:57 ` Arnd Bergmann
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=200502061257.40798.arnd@arndb.de \
--to=arnd@arndb.de \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=linuxppc64-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=trini@kernel.crashing.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.