Re: [PATCH] arm64: errata: Provide macro for major and minor cpu revisions

[Robert Richter]

On 12.01.17 15:33:15, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 01:11:42PM +0100, Robert Richter wrote:
> > Definition of cpu ranges are hard to read if the cpu variant is not
> > zero. Provide MIDR_CPU_FULL_REV() macro to describe the full hardware
> > revision of a cpu including variant and (minor) revision.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Robert Richter <rrichter@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  arch/arm64/include/asm/cputype.h |  3 +++
> >  arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_errata.c   | 15 +++++++++------
> >  arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c   |  8 +++-----
> >  3 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cputype.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cputype.h
> > index 26a68ddb11c1..983e59cbdd54 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cputype.h
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cputype.h
> > @@ -56,6 +56,9 @@
> >  	(0xf			<< MIDR_ARCHITECTURE_SHIFT) | \
> >  	((partnum)		<< MIDR_PARTNUM_SHIFT))
> >  
> > +#define MIDR_CPU_FULL_REV(var, rev) \
> > +	(((var)	<< MIDR_VARIANT_SHIFT) | (rev))
> 
> Minor nit, but could you rename this to MIDR_CPU_VAR_REV instead please?
> The revision field *is* the bottom 4 bits, so "full" rev doesn't really
> make a lot of sense.

Yeah, this is that I had in my first version. I wasn't sure on the
naming, so I am fine with your proposal.

Will resubmit.

Thanks,

-Robert