Re: [PATCH v3 01/28] arm64: sysreg: Emit RESx/UNKN values for Mapping/Fields definitions

[Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>]

On Wed, 22 Jul 2026 08:55:53 +0100,
sashiko-bot@kernel.org wrote:
> 
> Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
> - [Low] The updated comment explicitly claims '"Mapping" does emit the RESx/UNKN definitions', which misleadingly omits the fact that the 'Fields' qualifier also emits these definitions.
> --
> 
> --- Patch [1]: [PATCH v3 01/28] arm64: sysreg: Emit RESx/UNKN values for Mapping/Fields definitions ---
> commit ed28be9bab17b360a9e12769aa91d7ac6b649b8d
> Author: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
> 
> arm64: sysreg: Emit RESx/UNKN values for Mapping/Fields definitions
> 
> This commit relaxes the rule that skips emitting definitions for Mapping
> and Fields qualifiers. It updates gen-sysreg.awk to emit RESx and UNKN
> values for both of these qualifiers.
> 
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/tools/gen-sysreg.awk b/arch/arm64/tools/gen-sysreg.awk
> > index 86860ab672dc7..e099f7d3b2833 100755
> > --- a/arch/arm64/tools/gen-sysreg.awk
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/tools/gen-sysreg.awk
> > @@ -228,7 +228,7 @@ $1 == "EndSysreg" && block_current() == "Sysreg" {
> >  }
> >  
> >  # Currently this is effectivey a comment, in future we may want to emit
> > -# defines for the fields.
> > +# defines for the fields. "Mapping" does emit the RESx/UNKN definitions.
> 
> [Severity: Low]
> This isn't a bug, but does this comment incorrectly imply that only "Mapping"
> emits the definitions? 
> 
> The condition on the next line applies identically to both "Fields" and
> "Mapping", and the commit message notes that both qualifiers are being updated
> to emit the RESx/UNKN values.

Fixed.

	M.

-- 
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.