From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 8/8] arm64/sysreg: Generate definitions for SCTLR_EL1
Date: Fri, 22 Apr 2022 14:42:30 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <YmKwxq2i8UrzQjRw@lakrids> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YmKcO9MLbgNTfvpl@sirena.org.uk>
On Fri, Apr 22, 2022 at 01:14:51PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 11:05:27AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 19, 2022 at 11:43:29AM +0100, Mark Brown wrote:
>
> > > Several fields which are defined in the current revision of DDI0487 but
> > > which are not yet used by the kernel are left as RES1 in order to ensure
> > > that the SCTLR_EL1_RES1 mask used for early initialisation of SCTLR_EL1 is
> > > not changed. These are LSMAOE, nTLSMD, EIS, TSCXT and EOS.
>
> > I think that going forward we'll hit similar issues when adding new fields, so
> > we probably want to distinguish "architecturally RESx" and "The kernel wants to
> > treat these as RESx".
>
> > I suspect we should add those fields to the scripting, but (manually) add a
> > definition to a header with both the architectural RES1 bits and the bits we're
> > treating as RES1 even though they're now been allocated a purpose.
>
> > I'm not sure how to name that clearly, though.
>
> I think I'd come to a similar conclusion but as you say the naming is
> annoying and in cases like these ones there's so few users and they're
> oring in other bits so it might be more sensible to just or in these now
> defined RES1 bits in the user, skipping out on the naming question
> entirely - in this case the usage is in INIT_SCTLR_EL2_MMU_*. Looking
> at it again now I'm inclined to go that way for this one.
FWIW, I'm perfectly happy with adding those bits explicitly in the
`INIT_SCTLR_EL*` definitions. The key thing I wanted is that as a
policy, `<regname>_RES1` is purely the architecturally RES1 bits.
Thanks,
Mark.
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-04-22 13:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-19 10:43 [PATCH v4 0/8] arm64: Automatic system register definition generation Mark Brown
2022-04-19 10:43 ` [PATCH v4 1/8] arm64/mte: Move shift from definition of TCF0 enumeration values Mark Brown
2022-04-21 9:33 ` Mark Rutland
2022-04-19 10:43 ` [PATCH v4 2/8] arm64/sysreg: Standardise ID_AA64ISAR0_EL1 macro names Mark Brown
2022-04-21 9:35 ` Mark Rutland
2022-04-19 10:43 ` [PATCH v4 3/8] arm64/sysreg: Rename SCTLR_EL1_NTWE/TWI to SCTLR_EL1_nTWE/TWI Mark Brown
2022-04-21 9:36 ` Mark Rutland
2022-04-19 10:43 ` [PATCH v4 4/8] arm64: Add sysreg header generation scripting Mark Brown
2022-04-21 9:47 ` Mark Rutland
2022-04-21 13:00 ` Mark Brown
2022-04-21 14:16 ` Mark Rutland
2022-04-21 14:50 ` Mark Brown
2022-04-21 15:35 ` Mark Rutland
2022-04-21 15:46 ` Mark Brown
2022-04-19 10:43 ` [PATCH v4 5/8] arm64/sysreg: Enable automatic generation of system register definitions Mark Brown
2022-04-21 9:52 ` Mark Rutland
2022-04-19 10:43 ` [PATCH v4 6/8] arm64/sysreg: Generate definitions for ID_AA64ISAR0_EL1 Mark Brown
2022-04-21 9:58 ` Mark Rutland
2022-04-19 10:43 ` [PATCH v4 7/8] arm64/sysreg: Generate definitions for TTBRn_EL1 Mark Brown
2022-04-21 9:59 ` Mark Rutland
2022-04-19 10:43 ` [PATCH v4 8/8] arm64/sysreg: Generate definitions for SCTLR_EL1 Mark Brown
2022-04-21 10:05 ` Mark Rutland
2022-04-22 12:14 ` Mark Brown
2022-04-22 13:42 ` Mark Rutland [this message]
2022-04-22 13:50 ` Mark Brown
2022-04-21 10:15 ` [PATCH v4 0/8] arm64: Automatic system register definition generation Mark Rutland
2022-04-21 15:14 ` Mark Brown
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=YmKwxq2i8UrzQjRw@lakrids \
--to=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=maz@kernel.org \
--cc=suzuki.poulose@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).