On Wed, 21 Feb 2018 18:29:19 +0100 David Hildenbrand <da...@redhat.com> wrote:
> On 21.02.2018 17:56, Halil Pasic wrote: s/390x/s390x/ > > The 'bit' field of the 'S390FeatDef' structure is not applicable to all > > its instances. Currently this field is not applicable, and remains > > unused, iff the feature is of type S390_FEAT_TYPE_MISC. Having the value 0 > > specified for multiple such feature definition was a little confusing, > > s/ / / also s/definition/definitions/ > > > as it's a perfectly legit bit value, and as the value of the bit > > field is usually ought to be unique for each feature of a given > > feature type. > > > > Let us introduce a specialized macro for defining features of type > > S390_FEAT_TYPE_MISC so, that one does not have to specify neither bit nor > > type (as the later is implied). > > s/later is implied/latter is implicit/ I kept 'implied'. > > > > > Signed-off-by: Halil Pasic <pa...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > --- > > > > v1 -> v2 > > * Specialized feature initializer macro for type MISC that does not > > require a bit value instead of defining a 'not a bit number' (that > > is extremal) bit number. > > --- > > target/s390x/cpu_features.c | 8 ++++++-- > > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) (...) > Reviewed-by: David Hildenbrand <da...@redhat.com> Thanks, applied.
