On Mon, Oct 18, 2021 at 01:37:12PM +0800, Xiaoyao Li wrote: > On 10/18/2021 11:46 AM, Xiaoyao Li wrote: > > On 10/16/2021 4:22 AM, Eduardo Habkost wrote: > > > On Thu, Sep 09, 2021 at 10:41:48PM +0800, Xiaoyao Li wrote: [...] > > > > +#define INTEL_PT_DEFAULT_0_EBX (CPUID_14_0_EBX_CR3_FILTER | \ > > > > + CPUID_14_0_EBX_PSB | CPUID_14_0_EBX_IP_FILTER | > > > > CPUID_14_0_EBX_MTC) > > > > +#define INTEL_PT_DEFAULT_0_ECX (CPUID_14_0_ECX_TOPA | \ > > > > + CPUID_14_0_ECX_MULTI_ENTRIES | CPUID_14_0_ECX_SINGLE_RANGE) > > > > +#define INTEL_PT_DEFAULT_1_EAX (INTEL_PT_DEFAULT_MTC_BITMAP << 16 | \ > > > > + INTEL_PT_DEFAULT_ADDR_RANGES_NUM) > > > > +#define INTEL_PT_DEFAULT_1_EBX (INTEL_PT_DEFAULT_PSB_BITMAP << 16 | \ > > > > + INTEL_PT_DEFAULT_CYCLE_BITMAP) > > > > > > I like these new macros because they make the code at > > > x86_cpu_filter_features() clearer. > > I tried it. But I find it doesn't make the code at x86_cpu_filter_features() > clearer. It just introduces more code churn.
Don't worry, this is not a requirement for getting the code accepted, but just a suggestion to make the more complex parts of the series smaller and easier to review. -- Eduardo
