Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753824AbZIATl6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Sep 2009 15:41:58 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752597AbZIATl6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Sep 2009 15:41:58 -0400 Received: from mail-ew0-f206.google.com ([209.85.219.206]:39535 "EHLO mail-ew0-f206.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752055AbZIATl5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Sep 2009 15:41:57 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=x3Zn2afBSEOLe/JvVbeqsNb1tnZYXfmWepr1DJa87qrgXC7RUXa075nUM5swaqZ7B9 E7fcoxKVaS+b4zcNLAbzkvp9LmsayIbQXe3iVqLEl6TysbrOMK7pyY7rT4VhazCw7tUS 23EIGdul/hTjLwl6hbcuLXyX8o+wFD0fOyhoc= Date: Tue, 1 Sep 2009 23:41:54 +0400 From: Cyrill Gorcunov To: Rakib Mullick , LKML , x86@kernel.org, Ingo Molnar , Yinghai Lu , Suresh Siddha Subject: Re: [Question] x86,APIC: In apicdef.h dfr,svr,...... shouldn't be const? Message-ID: <20090901194154.GB19964@lenovo> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1607 Lines: 49 [Cyrill Gorcunov - Tue, Sep 01, 2009 at 12:43:06PM +0400] | On 9/1/09, Rakib Mullick wrote: | > Hello guys, Intel System programmers guide says - dfr, svr, esr - this | > registers should be readonly. So shouldn't they use const? Or is it | > anything else? | | Hi Rakib, i dont have sources under my hands at moment, but iirc there | were situations we nees to poke esr register. | | > | > And apicdef.h also contains a style problem, checkpatch warns about | > following style: | > | > u32 spurious_vector : 8 | > | > Check patch wants as: | > | > u32 spurious_vector:8 | > | > Shouldn't this issues be fixed? | > | > Thanks, | > -- | | i dont see reason why not ;) | though i wonder why we need this structure at all. We may have | extended amd entries. | Yinghai cced. | Ingo, Yinghai, Suresh, is there any particular reason we keep apicdef.h:struct local_apic at all? Was there some plan on this structure usage in future? If take into account amd extended registers this structure doesn't cover all possible cases. And at moment we do poke apic registers via APIC_ macros mostly and it seems that is the more convenient and flexible approach. The only thing I may imagine where we could (possibly) use it in future is suspend/resume cases. But perhaps I miss something? -- Cyrill -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/