On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 07:45:45PM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> On 09/26/2013 12:01 PM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > +int powernv_hwrng_present(void)
> > +{
> > + return __raw_get_cpu_var(powernv_rng) != NULL;
> > +}
> > +
> > static unsigned long rng_whiten(struct powernv_rng *rng, unsigned long val)
> > {
> > unsigned long parity;
> > @@ -42,6 +48,17 @@ static unsigned long rng_whiten(struct powernv_rng *rng, unsigned long val)
> > return val;
> > }
> >
> > +int powernv_get_random_real_mode(unsigned long *v)
> > +{
> > + struct powernv_rng *rng;
> > +
> > + rng = __raw_get_cpu_var(powernv_rng);
> > +
> > + *v = rng_whiten(rng, in_rm64(rng->regs_real));
> > +
>
> Will it be in_be64() instead of in_rm64() ? Its failing the build here. Except this
> all individual patches build correctly.
No it's definitely not in_be64() - that will checkstop your machine :)
I added in_rm64() in a previous patch, "Add real mode cache inhibited
IO accessors" - I just didn't want to spam the KVM guys with those
patches as well.
Thanks for the review & testing.
cheers
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
