From: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
To: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@intel.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v2] x86: Add an archinfo dumper module
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2016 20:46:55 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160209194655.GF4119@pd.tnic> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160209191758.GA21766@agluck-desk.sc.intel.com>
On Tue, Feb 09, 2016 at 11:17:59AM -0800, Luck, Tony wrote:
> There is a lot of bit counting and typing either way. My string
> format is visually compact, and looks quite similar to the eventual
> output.
Except if you have 64 all single bits and all defined. Then that thing:
+static char *cr4_format =
+"41r|PKE|SMAP|SMEP|1r|OSXSAVE|PCIDE|FSGSBASE|1r|SMXE|VMXE|2r|OSXMMEXCPT|OSFXSR|PCE|PGE|MCE|PAE|PSE|DE|TSD|PVI|VME";
triples. The array approach is going to be long too but in the
vertical and still visually parseable.
> Your reg_range does allow you to pass counting to the compiler
> in the case that the documentation gives you highbit/lowbit
> ranges. But most fields are small enough that yuo don't even
> need to take your socks off to count ... so I don't see it as
> a huge deal.
>
> Both formats allow for a sanity check that all the bitfields
> add up to 64 ... which will detect single errors (which your
> code for my example would fail because you missed the second
> reserved field) and only have 60 bits described).
The code iterating over reg_descriptor can check that, of course.
So the only thing I'm trying to avoid is string parsing - if you add all
the corner cases handling and more field syntax, then the whole parsing
game could become pretty complex and maybe even fragile.
Not with the range descriptors - that remains simple. And I like simple.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
ECO tip #101: Trim your mails when you reply.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-09 19:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-02-01 11:56 [RFC] Dump interesting arch/platform info Borislav Petkov
2016-02-01 23:29 ` Luck, Tony
2016-02-02 9:41 ` Borislav Petkov
2016-02-03 10:48 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-02-03 11:00 ` Borislav Petkov
2016-02-04 15:22 ` [PATCH -v2] x86: Add an archinfo dumper module Borislav Petkov
2016-02-04 19:07 ` Luck, Tony
2016-02-07 10:51 ` Borislav Petkov
2016-02-09 19:17 ` Luck, Tony
2016-02-09 19:46 ` Borislav Petkov [this message]
2016-02-05 19:51 ` Luck, Tony
2016-02-05 22:24 ` Luck, Tony
2016-02-08 0:01 ` H. Peter Anvin
2016-02-08 7:50 ` Boris Petkov
2016-02-09 12:23 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-02-09 14:01 ` Borislav Petkov
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=20160209194655.GF4119@pd.tnic \
--to=bp@alien8.de \
--cc=brgerst@gmail.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=luto@amacapital.net \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
/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.