All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64/cache: Fix cache_type_cwg() for register generation
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2022 14:33:02 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Yv4/jjL3Itj70Mms@sirena.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Yv48c92AukRk0VTM@FVFF77S0Q05N.cambridge.arm.com>


[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1150 bytes --]

On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 02:20:18PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 17, 2022 at 07:22:26PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 17, 2022 at 05:56:24PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:

> > > | #define CTR_CWG(ctr)          SYS_FIELD_GET(CTR_EL0, CWG, ctr)

> > I think if we're going to define that sort of per bitfield accessor
> > macro (which is certainly a valid and reasonable thing to do) we should
> > be having the script generate them rather than open coding them but
> > that's getting out of scope for a fix and should be done separately.

> I'm not asking for us to do that for *every* bitfield accessor, I'm just asking
> for us to be locally consistent within cache.h.

If we're going to introduce that sort of rule it should probably be a
general thing rather than a per header thing, the CTR_L1IP() thing was
a preexisting thing that was just converted in place rather than a style
we were trying to say was a good idea that should be replicated.

> I'm also happy to use SYS_FIELD_GET() directly within cache_type_cwg(), and not
> define CTR_CWG().

Sure, that's less problematic and indeed currently going through my
testing.

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 176 bytes --]

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  reply	other threads:[~2022-08-18 13:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-08-17 16:02 [PATCH] arm64/cache: Fix cache_type_cwg() for register generation Mark Brown
2022-08-17 16:56 ` Mark Rutland
2022-08-17 17:25   ` Mark Rutland
2022-08-17 18:22   ` Mark Brown
2022-08-18 13:20     ` Mark Rutland
2022-08-18 13:33       ` Mark Brown [this message]
2022-08-18 13:40         ` Mark Rutland

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=Yv4/jjL3Itj70Mms@sirena.org.uk \
    --to=broonie@kernel.org \
    --cc=ardb@kernel.org \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=will@kernel.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.