From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1752639AbcF1Q2K (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 28 Jun 2016 12:28:10 -0400
Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:48846 "EHLO foss.arm.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1752196AbcF1Q2H (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 28 Jun 2016 12:28:07 -0400
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 17:27:56 +0100
From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
Cc: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>, will.deacon@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: <20160628162755.GR31744@leverpostej>
References: <1466507556-9027-1-git-send-email-suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
 <20160628153346.GF4585@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20160628153346.GF4585@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 04:33:46PM +0100, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> 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?

Per Documentation/filesystems/sysfs.txt, attributes should be ASCII text
files, with one value per file. I think they should stay as they are.

Thanks,
Mark.