Uwe Hermann wrote:
> -static inline struct cpuid_result cpuid(int op)
> +static inline struct cpuid_result cpuid(u32 op)
> {
> - struct cpuid_result result;
> - asm volatile(
> - "cpuid"
> - : "=a" (result.eax),
> - "=b" (result.ebx),
> - "=c" (result.ecx),
> - "=d" (result.edx)
> - : "0" (op));
> - return result;
> + struct cpuid_result r;
> + _cpuid(op, &r.eax, &r.ebx, %r.ecx, &r.edx);
> + return r;
> }
>
> +/**
> + * Generic CPUID function.
> + *
> + * Clear %ecx since some CPUs (Cyrix MII) do not set or clear %ecx,
> + * resulting in stale register contents being returned.
> + */
> +static inline void _cpuid(u32 op, u32 *eax, u32 *ebx, u32 *ecx, u32 *edx)
> +{
> + *eax = op;
> + *ecx = 0;
> + native_cpuid(eax, ebx, ecx, edx);
> +}
Is there any reason not to combine these two functions? Maybe it's just
me, but I don't like seeing one function call another, make some menial
changes then call a third, all with the exact same variables, and to
complete one task. And, uh, does this build okay? I don't see a forward
declaration of _cpuid, but it might be in the rest of the file or
somewhere else.
-Corey
--
linuxbios mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.linuxbios.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxbios
