Re: [PATCH v6 03/10] x86, mpx: add macro cpu_has_mpx

[H. Peter Anvin]

On 06/18/2014 07:35 AM, Dave Hansen wrote:
> 
> It looks like static_cpu_has() is the right thing to use instead of
> boot_cpu_has().  But, this doesn't just obfuscate things.
> 
> We actually _want_ the compiler to cull code out when the config option
> is off.  Things like do_bounds() will see code savings with _some_ kind
> of #ifdef rather than using static_cpu_has().
> 
> So, we can either use the well worn, consistent with other features in
> x86, cpu_has_$foo approach.  Or, we can roll our own macros.
> 

We could do something like:

#define MPX_ENABLED (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_X86_MPX) &&
static_cpu_has(X86_FEATURE_MPX))

	-hpa

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/