From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 1/5] arm64: cpufeature: Add scope for capability check
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 18:38:10 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160414173809.GN4584@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1459941854-5190-2-git-send-email-suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
Hi Suzuki,
On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 12:24:10PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> Add scope parameter to the arm64_cpu_capabilities::matches(),
> so that this can be reused for checking the capability on a
> given CPU vs the system wide. By default, the system uses
> 'system' wide values for setting the CPU_HWCAPs and ELF_HWCAPs.
>
> Cc: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
> Cc: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
> Cc: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com>
> Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
> ---
> arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h | 8 +++++++-
> arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_errata.c | 2 +-
> arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c | 37 +++++++++++++++++++----------------
> 3 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h
> index ca8fb4b..5f10344 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h
> @@ -78,10 +78,16 @@ struct arm64_ftr_reg {
> struct arm64_ftr_bits *ftr_bits;
> };
>
> +/* scope of capability check */
> +enum {
> + SCOPE_SYSTEM,
> + SCOPE_CPU,
> +};
> +
> struct arm64_cpu_capabilities {
> const char *desc;
> u16 capability;
> - bool (*matches)(const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *);
> + bool (*matches)(const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *caps, int scope);
> void (*enable)(void *); /* Called on all active CPUs */
> union {
> struct { /* To be used for erratum handling only */
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_errata.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_errata.c
> index 06afd04..2fd5780 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_errata.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_errata.c
> @@ -22,7 +22,7 @@
> #include <asm/cpufeature.h>
>
> static bool __maybe_unused
> -is_affected_midr_range(const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *entry)
> +is_affected_midr_range(const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *entry, int __unused)
Maybe it would be better to WARN if somebody passes SCOPE_SYSTEM, rather
than silently treat it as per-cpu?
Will
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
To: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, marc.zyngier@arm.com,
catalin.marinas@arm.com, mark.rutland@arm.com,
Vadim.Lomovtsev@caviumnetworks.com,
James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] arm64: cpufeature: Add scope for capability check
Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2016 18:38:10 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160414173809.GN4584@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1459941854-5190-2-git-send-email-suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
Hi Suzuki,
On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 12:24:10PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> Add scope parameter to the arm64_cpu_capabilities::matches(),
> so that this can be reused for checking the capability on a
> given CPU vs the system wide. By default, the system uses
> 'system' wide values for setting the CPU_HWCAPs and ELF_HWCAPs.
>
> Cc: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
> Cc: Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>
> Cc: Andre Przywara <andre.przywara@arm.com>
> Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
> ---
> arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h | 8 +++++++-
> arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_errata.c | 2 +-
> arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c | 37 +++++++++++++++++++----------------
> 3 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h
> index ca8fb4b..5f10344 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h
> @@ -78,10 +78,16 @@ struct arm64_ftr_reg {
> struct arm64_ftr_bits *ftr_bits;
> };
>
> +/* scope of capability check */
> +enum {
> + SCOPE_SYSTEM,
> + SCOPE_CPU,
> +};
> +
> struct arm64_cpu_capabilities {
> const char *desc;
> u16 capability;
> - bool (*matches)(const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *);
> + bool (*matches)(const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *caps, int scope);
> void (*enable)(void *); /* Called on all active CPUs */
> union {
> struct { /* To be used for erratum handling only */
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_errata.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_errata.c
> index 06afd04..2fd5780 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_errata.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpu_errata.c
> @@ -22,7 +22,7 @@
> #include <asm/cpufeature.h>
>
> static bool __maybe_unused
> -is_affected_midr_range(const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *entry)
> +is_affected_midr_range(const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *entry, int __unused)
Maybe it would be better to WARN if somebody passes SCOPE_SYSTEM, rather
than silently treat it as per-cpu?
Will
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-04-14 17:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-04-06 11:24 [PATCH 0/5] arm64: Fix behavior of maxcpus=n Suzuki K Poulose
2016-04-06 11:24 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2016-04-06 11:24 ` [PATCH 1/5] arm64: cpufeature: Add scope for capability check Suzuki K Poulose
2016-04-06 11:24 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2016-04-14 17:38 ` Will Deacon [this message]
2016-04-14 17:38 ` Will Deacon
2016-04-14 17:47 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2016-04-14 17:47 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2016-04-15 12:55 ` Will Deacon
2016-04-15 12:55 ` Will Deacon
2016-04-15 13:26 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2016-04-15 13:26 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2016-04-06 11:24 ` [PATCH 2/5] arm64: Allow a capability to be checked on a single CPU Suzuki K Poulose
2016-04-06 11:24 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2016-04-06 11:24 ` [PATCH 3/5] irqchip/gic: Restore CPU interface checking Suzuki K Poulose
2016-04-06 11:24 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2016-04-06 11:24 ` [PATCH 4/5] arm64: Verify CPU errata work arounds on hotplugged CPU Suzuki K Poulose
2016-04-06 11:24 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2016-04-14 17:39 ` Will Deacon
2016-04-14 17:39 ` Will Deacon
2016-04-14 17:49 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2016-04-14 17:49 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2016-04-15 14:10 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2016-04-15 14:10 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2016-04-15 14:12 ` Will Deacon
2016-04-15 14:12 ` Will Deacon
2016-04-18 13:41 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2016-04-18 13:41 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2016-04-06 11:24 ` [PATCH 5/5] arm64: Fix behavior of maxcpus=N Suzuki K Poulose
2016-04-06 11:24 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2016-04-07 9:18 ` James Morse
2016-04-07 9:18 ` James Morse
2016-04-07 9:26 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2016-04-07 9:26 ` Suzuki K Poulose
2016-04-07 10:07 ` [UPDATED] " Suzuki K Poulose
2016-04-07 10:07 ` Suzuki K Poulose
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160414173809.GN4584@arm.com \
--to=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.