On 06/18/2014 02:57 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote: >> > @@ -339,6 +339,12 @@ extern const char * const x86_power_flags[32]; >> > #define cpu_has_eager_fpu boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_EAGER_FPU) >> > #define cpu_has_topoext boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_TOPOEXT) >> > >> > +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_INTEL_MPX >> > +#define cpu_has_mpx boot_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_MPX) > I think we don't want those macros anymore because they're obfuscating > the code. You should use static_cpu_has instead.
It looks like static_cpu_has() is the right thing to use instead of boot_cpu_has(). But, this doesn't just obfuscate things. We actually _want_ the compiler to cull code out when the config option is off. Things like do_bounds() will see code savings with _some_ kind of #ifdef rather than using static_cpu_has(). So, we can either use the well worn, consistent with other features in x86, cpu_has_$foo approach. Or, we can roll our own macros. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
