On 11.05.21 16:41, Claudio Imbrenda wrote:
On Tue, 11 May 2021 13:43:36 +0200
David Hildenbrand <david@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 10.05.21 17:00, Janosch Frank wrote:
Lets grab more of the feature bits from SCLP read info so we can use
them in the cpumodel tests.
Signed-off-by: Janosch Frank <frankja@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Claudio Imbrenda <imbrenda@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
lib/s390x/sclp.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++
lib/s390x/sclp.h | 38 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
2 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/lib/s390x/sclp.c b/lib/s390x/sclp.c
index f11c2035..f25cfdb2 100644
--- a/lib/s390x/sclp.c
+++ b/lib/s390x/sclp.c
@@ -129,6 +129,13 @@ CPUEntry *sclp_get_cpu_entries(void)
return (CPUEntry *)(_read_info + read_info->offset_cpu);
}
+static bool sclp_feat_check(int byte, int mask)
+{
+ uint8_t *rib = (uint8_t *)read_info;
+
+ return !!(rib[byte] & mask);
+}
Instead of a mask, I'd just check for bit (offset) numbers within the
byte.
static bool sclp_feat_check(int byte, int bit)
{
uint8_t *rib = (uint8_t *)read_info;
return !!(rib[byte] & (0x80 >> bit));
}
using a mask might be useful to check multiple facilities at the same
time, but in that case the check should be
IMHO checking with a mask here multiple facilities will be very error
prone either way ... and we only have a single byte to check for.
--
Thanks,
David / dhildenb
