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 4B0E2C3DA64 for ; Wed, 31 Jul 2024 16:23:51 +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:In-Reply-To:Content-Type: MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date:Reply-To: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date: Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Owner; bh=RccWDvZ7oX89k66UzW1OTJZk5KWoCXLsKsRG45o+Qm4=; b=2QNODCFZANxTAVT0UftG6IvhiA CY7UbNzZfjRHpL9P6vEQ896f6xDCguKQUa6/5WgD2ao9uzOe77EXZ6y8S8NNnFhhL0ytGaKQuSImH 3XWgtXfE56Tk8NIFGlBiECZCALBxFGjW+HpYp26vTU3vGgT8fSiwSaS1HtPSpUYPLPD1QK+FbFTYz zrR0lhje0MrveXs/W+xDMMwb8VcgzE8ZgwfKQafC+pJt0YCew5pYQiPKKg0HnUSbZPppZFI6ms+0t xbO/YHo6dc19h6pQCVqn2VIzhMZIMD/0HsheyK5vBVUPV/liClEoe9SmKBoxA7kdOP0GFIWjew51V tLZleGtQ==; Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.97.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1sZC73-00000001qsS-2Bsu; Wed, 31 Jul 2024 16:23:41 +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 1sZC6a-00000001qnh-3xV1 for linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; Wed, 31 Jul 2024 16:23:14 +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 BC72D1007; Wed, 31 Jul 2024 09:23:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from e133380.arm.com (e133380.arm.com [10.1.197.55]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 63B303F5A1; Wed, 31 Jul 2024 09:23:11 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 31 Jul 2024 17:23:09 +0100 From: Dave Martin To: Mark Brown Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Joey Gouly Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: signal: Update sigcontext reservations table Message-ID: References: <4beceb69-b66d-43cd-89ca-0a3eed6b4ccc@sirena.org.uk> <4c847f4c-6a99-49c2-a3a9-60c1e30a4e7b@sirena.org.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-CRM114-Version: 20100106-BlameMichelson ( TRE 0.8.0 (BSD) ) MR-646709E3 X-CRM114-CacheID: sfid-20240731_092313_047342_877CDEF2 X-CRM114-Status: GOOD ( 18.74 ) 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 Wed, Jul 31, 2024 at 05:14:46PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > On Wed, Jul 31, 2024 at 05:09:36PM +0100, Dave Martin wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 31, 2024 at 03:58:00PM +0100, Mark Brown wrote: > > > > + * where vl is the non-streaming SVE vector length, as set with PR_SVE_SET_VL, > > > + * and svl is the streaming SVE vector length, as set with PR_SME_SET_VL. > > > > I'd just say VL is the vector length, that's the term the architecture > > > uses and it says it's set with PR_SVE_SET_VL to clarify. > > > It's the worst-case sigframe size that we care about here, regardless > > of what code a signal is delivered in the middle of. Surely that > > depends on both vector length settings? > > Sure - what I'm saying is that you should refer to the non-streaming > vector length as just the vector length in line with the architecture > terminology. The architecture does refer to the streaming vector length > as the streaming SVE vector length sometimes so I guess we can stick > with that there. > > > Can you think of a description that clarifies this? > > s/non-streaming SVE vector length/vector length/ Oh, I thought you were commenting on the pair of statements making an unnecessary distinction, rather than just commenting on the wording for PR_SVE_SET_VL. I thought that "non-streaming SVE vector length" might be less ambiguous given that there was no SME when I originally worded this. I have no problem with just saying "vector length" to refer to this setting though. You're right that mentioning PR_SVE_SET_VL should make it unambiguous anyway. Cheers ---Dave