Ray Lee wrote:
quoted text
> On Feb 10, 2008 8:36 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_64BIT
>> +       } else if ((count =3D=3D 8) && (((long)mem & 7) =3D=3D 0)) {
>> +               u64 tmp_ll;
>> +               if (probe_kernel_address(mem, tmp_ll))
>> +                       return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
>> +
>> +               mem +=3D 8;
>> +#ifdef __BIG_ENDIAN
>> +               *buf++ =3D hexchars[(tmp_ll >> 60) & 0xf];
>> +               *buf++ =3D hexchars[(tmp_ll >> 56) & 0xf];
>> +               *buf++ =3D hexchars[(tmp_ll >> 52) & 0xf];
>> +               *buf++ =3D hexchars[(tmp_ll >> 48) & 0xf];
>> +               *buf++ =3D hexchars[(tmp_ll >> 44) & 0xf];
>> +               *buf++ =3D hexchars[(tmp_ll >> 40) & 0xf];
>> +               *buf++ =3D hexchars[(tmp_ll >> 36) & 0xf];
>> +               *buf++ =3D hexchars[(tmp_ll >> 32) & 0xf];
>> +               *buf++ =3D hexchars[(tmp_ll >> 28) & 0xf];
>> +               *buf++ =3D hexchars[(tmp_ll >> 24) & 0xf];
>> +               *buf++ =3D hexchars[(tmp_ll >> 20) & 0xf];
>> +               *buf++ =3D hexchars[(tmp_ll >> 16) & 0xf];
>> +               *buf++ =3D hexchars[(tmp_ll >> 12) & 0xf];
>> +               *buf++ =3D hexchars[(tmp_ll >> 8) & 0xf];
>> +               *buf++ =3D hexchars[(tmp_ll >> 4) & 0xf];
>> +               *buf++ =3D hexchars[tmp_ll & 0xf];
>> +#else
>> +               *buf++ =3D hexchars[(tmp_ll >> 4) & 0xf];
>> +               *buf++ =3D hexchars[tmp_ll & 0xf];
>> +               *buf++ =3D hexchars[(tmp_ll >> 12) & 0xf];
>> +               *buf++ =3D hexchars[(tmp_ll >> 8) & 0xf];
>> +               *buf++ =3D hexchars[(tmp_ll >> 20) & 0xf];
>> +               *buf++ =3D hexchars[(tmp_ll >> 16) & 0xf];
>> +               *buf++ =3D hexchars[(tmp_ll >> 28) & 0xf];
>> +               *buf++ =3D hexchars[(tmp_ll >> 24) & 0xf];
>> +               *buf++ =3D hexchars[(tmp_ll >> 36) & 0xf];
>> +               *buf++ =3D hexchars[(tmp_ll >> 32) & 0xf];
>> +               *buf++ =3D hexchars[(tmp_ll >> 44) & 0xf];
>> +               *buf++ =3D hexchars[(tmp_ll >> 40) & 0xf];
>> +               *buf++ =3D hexchars[(tmp_ll >> 52) & 0xf];
>> +               *buf++ =3D hexchars[(tmp_ll >> 48) & 0xf];
>> +               *buf++ =3D hexchars[(tmp_ll >> 60) & 0xf];
>> +               *buf++ =3D hexchars[(tmp_ll >> 56) & 0xf];
>> +#endif
>=20
> Am I missing something? (I'm due, so it's not really a rhetorical
> question :-) .) Wouldn't
>=20
> unsigned int void u64_to_hex(u64 val, unsigned char *buf)
> {
>          int i;
>          for (i=3D15; i>=3D0; i--) {
>                   buf[i] =3D hexchars[ val & 0x0f ];
>                   val >>=3D 4;
>          }
>          return 16;
> }
> ...
>          buf +=3D u64_to_hex(cpu_to_be64(tmp_ll), buf);
>=20
> be clearer both visually, and code-as-intent? (And equivalent helpers
> for u32, u16 -- though they could all be rolled into one.)

Yes, will come, I just produced some ETOOMANYCHANGESATONCE issue while
improving this. The code goes down by more than 150 lines!

Jan