Russell King - ARM Linux <[email protected]> writes: > On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 01:26:01PM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: >> Christoffer Dall <[email protected]> writes: >> >> > On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 11:24 AM, Russell King - ARM Linux >> > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 01:38:55PM -0500, Christoffer Dall wrote: >> >>> + /* -ENOENT for unknown features, -EINVAL for invalid combinations. >> >>> */ >> >>> + for (i = 0; i < sizeof(init->features)*8; i++) { >> >>> + if (init->features[i / 32] & (1 << (i % 32))) { >> >> >> >> Isn't this an open-coded version of test_bit() ? >> > >> > indeed, nicely spotted: >> >> BTW, I wrote it that was out of excessive paranoia: it's a userspace >> API, and test_bit() won't be right on 64 bit BE systems. > > So why is this a concern for 32-bit systems (which are, by definition, > only in arch/arm) ?
Because this feature bitmap system is the same code which other archs *should* be using for specifying kvm cpus :) Cheers, Rusty. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
