Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v5 03/27] x86/fpu/xstate: Introduce XSAVES system states | From | Randy Dunlap <> | Date | Wed, 17 Oct 2018 15:39:47 -0700 |
| |
On 10/17/18 3:41 AM, Borislav Petkov wrote:
>> @@ -702,6 +703,7 @@ static int init_xstate_size(void) >> */ >> static void fpu__init_disable_system_xstate(void) >> { >> + xfeatures_mask_all = 0; >> xfeatures_mask_user = 0; >> cr4_clear_bits(X86_CR4_OSXSAVE); >> fpu__xstate_clear_all_cpu_caps(); >> @@ -717,6 +719,8 @@ void __init fpu__init_system_xstate(void) >> static int on_boot_cpu __initdata = 1; >> int err; >> int i; >> + u64 cpu_user_xfeatures_mask; >> + u64 cpu_system_xfeatures_mask; > > Please sort function local variables declaration in a reverse christmas > tree order: > > <type> longest_variable_name; > <type> shorter_var_name; > <type> even_shorter; > <type> i;
Hi,
Would you mind explaining this request? (requirement?) Other than to say that it is the preference of some maintainers, please say Why it is preferred.
and since the <type>s above won't typically be the same length, it's not for variable name alignment, right?
thanks, -- ~Randy
| |