|
From: | Pierre Morel |
Subject: | Re: [PATCH v19 01/21] s390x/cpu topology: add s390 specifics to CPU topology |
Date: | Tue, 4 Apr 2023 16:04:18 +0200 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.8.0 |
On 4/4/23 14:35, Cédric Le Goater wrote:
@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@ +/* + * CPU Topology + * + * Copyright IBM Corp. 2022Shouldn't we have some range : 2022-2023 ?There was a discussion on this in the first spins, I think to remember that Nina wanted 22 and Thomas 23,now we have a third opinion :) .I must say that all three have their reasons and I take what the majority wants.There is an internal IBM document describing the copyright tags. If I recall well, first date is the first year the code was officially published, secondyear is the last year it was modified (so last commit of the year). Or something like that and it's theory, because we tend to forget. For an example, see the OPAL FW https://github.com/open-power/skiboot/, and run : "grep Copyright.*IBM" in the OPAL FW
OK for me, it looks logical, and all three of you are right then. So I will use Copyright IBM Corp. 2022-2023 in the next spin if nobody is against. Thanks, Pierre
[ ...]@@ -30,8 +30,19 @@ static char *cpu_hierarchy_to_string(MachineState *ms){ MachineClass *mc = MACHINE_GET_CLASS(ms); GString *s = g_string_new(NULL); + const char *multiply = " * ", *prefix = ""; - g_string_append_printf(s, "sockets (%u)", ms->smp.sockets); + if (mc->smp_props.drawers_supported) { + g_string_append_printf(s, "drawers (%u)", ms->smp.drawers); + prefix = multiply;indent issue.right, seems I forgot to update the patch set after the checkpatch.nope, you didn't. checkpatch doesn't report it. It's not perfect :/ C.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |