From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C2CDC3DA64 for ; Mon, 5 Aug 2024 03:28:20 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender:List-Subscribe:List-Help :List-Post:List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:In-Reply-To:From:References:Cc:To:Subject:MIME-Version:Date: Message-ID:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=BL8r/B7hF+Emrajf1MqGZ6YxICXJCkGk+4gqeJMRzFw=; b=INDzplGzj2/uUgIgSglPW3Li9A pzmNO1HPMaQiCNovkP4g1sv/sdvWfPMGu0e6OqgnlKSBUfQtFA4Eoif2HeXaMBU0e+n7avBRWNQtF 5ryrTG2RHQekwGZrqGlDijA8j11Hj/wo6YkP++3RfXcOJPqLoWioXAvsdYINF7IDABRfZ9yYaUVcL 3YtXbWMzh0wE7l6sfEGP9VxXnlKmQGYLXBtrHKzsTuOpV59pk+GszpJlgfBXOiTbA2vqNPbP7PZ0w DTlBpbrhutQqzwT3XcQj2Qq9fF8UrSl5AojEjDUzfse8eWfb0/VP3WFOE/MP5cAG1X/JhYk+MqMVf VTM9Os/Q==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1saoOJ-0000000EVS6-1W3T; Mon, 05 Aug 2024 03:28:11 +0000 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1saoNo-0000000EVIC-0iYN for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Mon, 05 Aug 2024 03:27:41 +0000 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14829143D; Sun, 4 Aug 2024 20:28:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.162.41.10] (a077893.blr.arm.com [10.162.41.10]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3398C3F5A1; Sun, 4 Aug 2024 20:27:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <8a25787d-6684-450b-bb1c-f6b5e84fbd4e@arm.com> Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2024 08:57:32 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] arm64/tools/sysreg: Add Sysreg128/SysregFields128 To: Mark Rutland Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Mark Brown , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org References: <20240801054436.612024-1-anshuman.khandual@arm.com> <20240801054436.612024-2-anshuman.khandual@arm.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Anshuman Khandual In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20240804_202740_284906_EC7543D6 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 16.36 ) X-BeenThere: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On 8/3/24 16:42, Mark Rutland wrote: > On Thu, Aug 01, 2024 at 11:14:36AM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote: >> FEAT_SYSREG128 enables 128 bit wide system registers which also need to be >> defined in (arch/arm64/toos/sysreg) for auto mask generation. This adds two >> new field types i.e Sysreg128 and SysregFields128 for that same purpose. It >> utilizes recently added macro GENMASK_U128() while also adding some helpers >> such as define_field_128() and parse_bitdef_128(). >> >> Cc: Catalin Marinas >> Cc: Will Deacon >> Cc: Mark Brown >> Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org >> Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org >> Signed-off-by: Anshuman Khandual >> --- >> arch/arm64/tools/gen-sysreg.awk | 231 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 231 insertions(+) > Having Sysreg128 and SysregFields128 sounds reasonable, though I suspect > we can share more code with Sysreg and SysregFields (e.g. by always > using GENMASK128() even for regular SYsreg and SysregFIilds). GENMASK_U128() should deliver same bit masks that could be used instead of earlier GENMASK_ULL() bit masks. Sounds good. > > Regardless of this patch in particular, I think we want to see some > end-to-end usage (i.e. some actual bit definitions, along with asm and C > code that uses these definitions) so that we're confident this is the > right way to capture these definitions. > > Sending this piecemeal, separate to those elements and sepate to > GENMASK_U128() makes this very painful to review effectively. Please > combine those elements into a single series so that reviewers can see > the entire picture. Sure, will try and combine the elements as as much possible.