From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752207AbcF1Pd4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Jun 2016 11:33:56 -0400 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:48317 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752018AbcF1Pdz (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Jun 2016 11:33:55 -0400 Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 16:33:46 +0100 From: Catalin Marinas To: Suzuki K Poulose Cc: will.deacon@arm.com, mark.rutland@arm.com, steve.capper@linaro.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] arm64: cpuinfo: Expose MIDR_EL1 and REVIDR_EL1 to sysfs Message-ID: <20160628153346.GF4585@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com> References: <1466507556-9027-1-git-send-email-suzuki.poulose@arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1466507556-9027-1-git-send-email-suzuki.poulose@arm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 12:12:36PM +0100, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote: > +#define CPUINFO_ATTR_RO(_name) \ > + static ssize_t show_##_name(struct device *dev, \ > + struct device_attribute *attr, char *buf) \ > + { \ > + struct cpuinfo_arm64 *info = &per_cpu(cpu_data, dev->id); \ > + \ > + if (info->reg_midr) \ > + return sprintf(buf, "0x%016x\n", info->reg_##_name); \ > + else \ > + return 0; \ > + } \ > + static DEVICE_ATTR(_name, 0444, show_##_name, NULL) > + > +CPUINFO_ATTR_RO(midr); > +CPUINFO_ATTR_RO(revidr); Since exposing these values is aimed at JIT code (and not human readable), wouldn't it make more sense to present the binary value instead of the ascii transformation? -- Catalin