On Mon, Jul 24 2023 at 22:49, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 24, 2023 at 07:44:17PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>
>> +static inline bool topo_subleaf(struct topo_scan *tscan, u32 leaf, u32 subleaf)
>> +{
>> + unsigned int dom, maxtype = leaf == 0xb ? CORE_TYPE + 1 : MAX_TYPE;
>> + struct {
>> + // eax
>> + u32 x2apic_shift : 5, // Number of bits to shift APIC ID right
>> + // for the topology ID at the next level
>> + __rsvd0 : 27; // Reserved
>> + // ebx
>> + u32 num_processors : 16, // Number of processors at current level
>> + __rsvd1 : 16; // Reserved
>> + // ecx
>> + u32 level : 8, // Current topology level. Same as sub leaf number
>> + type : 8, // Level type. If 0, invalid
>> + __rsvd2 : 16; // Reserved
>> + // edx
>> + u32 x2apic_id : 32; // X2APIC ID of the current logical processor
>
> That comment seems inconsistent, either have then all aligned or move
> all register names left.
Bah. I had all the register names left at some point. No idea how I lost
that again. Probably when I rolled back to some earlier version after
screwing up :)
>> +
>> + /* Read all available subleafs and populate the levels */
>> + for (subleaf = 0; topo_subleaf(tscan, leaf, subleaf); subleaf++);
>
> Personally I prefer:
>
> for (;;)
> ;
>
> that is, have the semicolon on it's own line, but meh.
:)
