On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 09:59:32PM +0100, Carsten Otte wrote: > Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 09:37:19PM +0100, Carsten Otte wrote: > >> Christoph Hellwig wrote: > >>> On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 05:25:26PM +0100, Carsten Otte wrote: > >>>> @@ -143,6 +143,10 @@ static noinline __init void detect_machi > >>>> /* Running on a P/390 ? */ > >>>> if (cpuinfo->cpu_id.machine == 0x7490) > >>>> machine_flags |= 4; > >>>> + > >>>> + /* Running under KVM ? */ > >>>> + if (cpuinfo->cpu_id.version == 0xfe) > >>>> + machine_flags |= 64; > >>> Shouldn't these have symbolic names? > >> You mean symbolics for machine_flags? Or symbolics for cpu ids? > > > > Either. > [...] > The machine flags do have symbolic names, defined in > include/asm-s390/setup.h. And yea, they should be used here. Will > change that. Since when do we have symbolic names for the bits? It was always on my todo list to do a cleanup and replace the numbers we use everywhere with names. Especially since we have clashes from time to time... but that didn't hurt enough yet, obviously. But now that you volunteered to take care of this... :) _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
