[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <d33b97aecfe09cab31ebf06de3e02b633314ae9d.camel@intel.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2024 12:24:15 +0000
From: "Huang, Kai" <kai.huang@...el.com>
To: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com" <dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com>
CC: "tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>, "jgross@...e.com"
<jgross@...e.com>, "x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>, "bp@...en8.de"
<bp@...en8.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] x86/cpu: Add and use new CPUID region helper
Nit:
> +
> +/* Returns true if the leaf exists and @value was populated */
^ is ?
> +static inline bool get_cpuid_region_leaf(u32 leaf, enum cpuid_regs_idx reg,
> + u32 *value)
> +{
> + u16 region = leaf >> 16;
> + u32 regs[4];
> +
> + if (cpuid_region_max_leaf(region) < leaf)
> + return false;
> +
> + cpuid(leaf, ®s[CPUID_EAX], ®s[CPUID_EBX],
> + ®s[CPUID_ECX], ®s[CPUID_EDX]);
> +
> + *value = regs[reg];
> +
> + return true;
> +}
I found despite the get_cpuid_region_leaf() returns true/false, the return value
is never used in this series. Instead, this series uses below pattern:
u32 data = 0; /* explicit initialization */
get_cpuid_region_leaf(leaf, ..., &data);
Which kinda implies the 'data' won't be touched if the requested leaf isn't
supported I suppose?
Since the return value is never used, should we consider just making this
function void?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists