From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by oss.sgi.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) id f372xRZ13360 for linux-mips-outgoing; Fri, 6 Apr 2001 19:59:27 -0700 Received: from dea.waldorf-gmbh.de (u-131-20.karlsruhe.ipdial.viaginterkom.de [62.180.20.131]) by oss.sgi.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f372xPM13356 for ; Fri, 6 Apr 2001 19:59:25 -0700 Received: (from ralf@localhost) by dea.waldorf-gmbh.de (8.11.1/8.11.1) id f372xG926381; Sat, 7 Apr 2001 04:59:16 +0200 Date: Sat, 7 Apr 2001 04:59:16 +0200 From: Ralf Baechle To: Scott A McConnell Cc: linux-mips@oss.sgi.com Subject: Re: set_cp0_status (mipsregs.h) Message-ID: <20010407045916.B26195@bacchus.dhis.org> References: <3ACE0BA3.98823D4D@cotw.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: <3ACE0BA3.98823D4D@cotw.com>; from samcconn@cotw.com on Fri, Apr 06, 2001 at 11:32:03AM -0700 X-Accept-Language: de,en,fr Sender: owner-linux-mips@oss.sgi.com Precedence: bulk On Fri, Apr 06, 2001 at 11:32:03AM -0700, Scott A McConnell wrote: > Which is correct? > 1 or 2 parameters ? > The first comes from a 2.4.0 kernel and the second from a 2.4.2 > extracted from cvs a few days ago. 1 Parameter; I changed the functions since about half the calls in the kernel code did show that whoever wrote the code didn't understand what the function is supposed to do. - set_cp0_status(bits) Set all the bits described by the bitmask bits in the status register. - clear_cp0_status(bits) Clear all the bits set in the bitmask argument bits in the status register. - change_cp0_status(change, set) Set all bits which are set in the bitmask change to the value given by the bitmask set; all other bits stay unchanged. This is the same as the old set_cp0_status function. Most people want to use {set,clear}_cp0_status(). Ralf