On 02/21/2018 05:56 PM, Halil Pasic wrote:
> The 'bit' field of the 'S390FeatDef' structure is not applicable to all
> its instances. Currently this field is not applicable, and remains
> unused, iff the feature is of type S390_FEAT_TYPE_MISC. Having the value 0
> specified for multiple such
On Wed, 21 Feb 2018 18:29:19 +0100
David Hildenbrand wrote:
> On 21.02.2018 17:56, Halil Pasic wrote:
s/390x/s390x/
> > The 'bit' field of the 'S390FeatDef' structure is not applicable to all
> > its instances. Currently this field is not applicable, and remains
> > unused,
On 21.02.2018 17:56, Halil Pasic wrote:
> The 'bit' field of the 'S390FeatDef' structure is not applicable to all
> its instances. Currently this field is not applicable, and remains
> unused, iff the feature is of type S390_FEAT_TYPE_MISC. Having the value 0
> specified for multiple such feature
The 'bit' field of the 'S390FeatDef' structure is not applicable to all
its instances. Currently this field is not applicable, and remains
unused, iff the feature is of type S390_FEAT_TYPE_MISC. Having the value 0
specified for multiple such feature definition was a little confusing,
as it's a