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 B2484C25B10 for ; Fri, 10 May 2024 18:09:57 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20210309; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=MNkK6BtCQfcnnvAMD33g35qtJq58gwpnAYymmCkaYJQ=; b=3LHNUifMiiPHy2 apEcrRtv0WgcadZwgnihlgAXmZuBrKTYt/HVxrFJ+ermSVVenOhG6AbE6LBl+Y54Dr82QUQfb7vNP 6mlpm1mYHFcVpkUS2p86hAWCaXSLRDgkaCQ+1whiazElGccncQaFfjjd8bCWv8sGSGbxbnuDq0QiW ega+4wWkR3Tm1hTljfWNEIEfzPRosxW/0RUEjAs1169AWSXOi3+7x+CHHv6yQ3WE23nBV7BPmdrwG odT6XmSVSbFlZrEySu1o84SfWHBeXGlEk8uu4VX3QqNOnz0P/Nb+WRM1CYXYZjp5bmOJ7B8xMGWlL LyO07cnTzCe8QJt1lOfA==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1s5Ugk-000000066hQ-1Ust; Fri, 10 May 2024 18:09:46 +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 1s5Ugh-000000066gW-09ry for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Fri, 10 May 2024 18:09:44 +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 6B18B150C; Fri, 10 May 2024 11:10:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from J2N7QTR9R3 (usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 789A33F6A8; Fri, 10 May 2024 11:09:37 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 10 May 2024 19:09:31 +0100 From: Mark Rutland To: Anshuman Khandual Cc: Marc Zyngier , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com, Oliver Upton , Will Deacon , kvmarm@lists.linux.dev, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Fuad Tabba Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] KVM: arm64: Replace custom macros with fields from ID_AA64PFR0_EL1 Message-ID: References: <20240418053804.2573071-1-anshuman.khandual@arm.com> <20240418053804.2573071-2-anshuman.khandual@arm.com> <871q73rufi.wl-maz@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20240510_110943_298827_F06C394E X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 12.60 ) 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: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-arm-kernel" Errors-To: linux-arm-kernel-bounces+linux-arm-kernel=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 07:53:14AM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote: > On 4/18/24 13:09, Marc Zyngier wrote: > > On Thu, 18 Apr 2024 06:38:03 +0100, > > Anshuman Khandual wrote: > >> #define PVM_ID_AA64PFR0_RESTRICT_UNSIGNED (\ > >> - FIELD_PREP(ARM64_FEATURE_MASK(ID_AA64PFR0_EL1_EL0), ID_AA64PFR0_EL1_ELx_64BIT_ONLY) | \ > >> - FIELD_PREP(ARM64_FEATURE_MASK(ID_AA64PFR0_EL1_EL1), ID_AA64PFR0_EL1_ELx_64BIT_ONLY) | \ > >> - FIELD_PREP(ARM64_FEATURE_MASK(ID_AA64PFR0_EL1_EL2), ID_AA64PFR0_EL1_ELx_64BIT_ONLY) | \ > >> - FIELD_PREP(ARM64_FEATURE_MASK(ID_AA64PFR0_EL1_EL3), ID_AA64PFR0_EL1_ELx_64BIT_ONLY) | \ > >> + FIELD_PREP(ARM64_FEATURE_MASK(ID_AA64PFR0_EL1_EL0), ID_AA64PFR0_EL1_EL0_IMP) | \ > >> + FIELD_PREP(ARM64_FEATURE_MASK(ID_AA64PFR0_EL1_EL1), ID_AA64PFR0_EL1_EL1_IMP) | \ > >> + FIELD_PREP(ARM64_FEATURE_MASK(ID_AA64PFR0_EL1_EL2), ID_AA64PFR0_EL1_EL2_IMP) | \ > >> + FIELD_PREP(ARM64_FEATURE_MASK(ID_AA64PFR0_EL1_EL3), ID_AA64PFR0_EL1_EL3_IMP) | \ > > > > If you are going to rework this, can we instead use something less > > verbose such as SYS_FIELD_GET()? > > Just wondering, is not FIELD_PREP() and SYS_FIELD_GET() does the exact opposite thing. > The earlier builds the entire register value from various constituents, where as the > later extracts a single register field from a complete register value instead. Or did > I just misunderstood something here. He means use one of the SYS_FIELD_*() helpers, e.g. SYS_FIELD_PREP_ENUM(), with which this can be: #define PVM_ID_AA64PFR0_RESTRICT_UNSIGNED (\ SYS_FIELD_PREP_ENUM(ID_AA64PFR0_EL1, EL0, IMP) | \ SYS_FIELD_PREP_ENUM(ID_AA64PFR0_EL1, EL1, IMP) | \ SYS_FIELD_PREP_ENUM(ID_AA64PFR0_EL1, EL2, IMP) | \ SYS_FIELD_PREP_ENUM(ID_AA64PFR0_EL1, EL3, IMP) | \ SYS_FIELD_PREP_ENUM(ID_AA64PFR0_EL1, RAS, IMP) \ ) ... which is far less verbose, and much easier to read. Mark. _______________________________________________ linux-arm-kernel mailing list linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel