This is a logcal followon to the last patch. It makes the
XFEATURE_MAX naming consistent with the other enum values.
This is what Ingo suggested.
Signed-off-by: Dave Hansen <dave.hansen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Andy Lutomirski <luto@amacapital.net>
Cc: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: Brian Gerst <brgerst@gmail.com>
Cc: Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@redhat.com>
Cc: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
Cc: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
Cc: dave@sr71.net
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20150902233127.A541448F@viggo.jf.intel.com
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
XFEATURE_ZMM_Hi256,
XFEATURE_Hi16_ZMM,
- XFEATURES_NR_MAX,
+ XFEATURE_MAX,
};
#define XFEATURE_MASK_FP (1 << XFEATURE_FP)
*/
u64 xfeatures_mask __read_mostly;
-static unsigned int xstate_offsets[XFEATURES_NR_MAX] = { [ 0 ... XFEATURES_NR_MAX - 1] = -1};
-static unsigned int xstate_sizes[XFEATURES_NR_MAX] = { [ 0 ... XFEATURES_NR_MAX - 1] = -1};
+static unsigned int xstate_offsets[XFEATURE_MAX] = { [ 0 ... XFEATURE_MAX - 1] = -1};
+static unsigned int xstate_sizes[XFEATURE_MAX] = { [ 0 ... XFEATURE_MAX - 1] = -1};
static unsigned int xstate_comp_offsets[sizeof(xfeatures_mask)*8];
/* The number of supported xfeatures in xfeatures_mask: */