From: "Taehyun Noh" <taehyun@utexas.edu>
To: "Catalin Marinas" <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
"Carl Worth" <carl@os.amperecomputing.com>
Cc: "Will Deacon" <will@kernel.org>,
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Peter Collingbourne" <pcc@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] arm64: mte: Clarify kernel MTE policy and manipulation of TCO
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2026 13:44:50 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <DFTOAG3ZYSFS.PHQA8FL20S6K@utexas.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aW51OPBNsydlJS30@arm.com>
On Mon Jan 19, 2026 at 12:17 PM CST, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> TBH, I'm fine with leaving the logic in this function without
> introducing a new user_uses_tagcheck() but not strongly opposed to it
> with better naming.
>
> That said, the set_kernel_mte_policy() naming looks too broad. The
> policy somehow implies tag check mode, fault behaviour. All it does is
> dealing with PSTATE.TCO.
I agree with your point. having TCO on the function name is more concise
than what I've suggested. We can drop this patch.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-01-20 19:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-01-15 23:07 [PATCH v2 0/2] arm64: mte: Improve performance by explicitly disabling unwanted tag checking Carl Worth
2026-01-15 23:07 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] arm64: mte: Clarify kernel MTE policy and manipulation of TCO Carl Worth
2026-01-19 18:17 ` Catalin Marinas
2026-01-20 19:44 ` Taehyun Noh [this message]
2026-01-15 23:07 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] arm64: mte: Set TCMA1 whenever MTE is present in the kernel Carl Worth
2026-01-19 17:57 ` Catalin Marinas
2026-01-22 10:23 ` Usama Anjum
2026-01-22 11:49 ` Catalin Marinas
2026-01-27 11:39 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] arm64: mte: Improve performance by explicitly disabling unwanted tag checking Will Deacon
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=DFTOAG3ZYSFS.PHQA8FL20S6K@utexas.edu \
--to=taehyun@utexas.edu \
--cc=carl@os.amperecomputing.com \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pcc@google.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox