From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Suzuki.Poulose@arm.com (Suzuki K Poulose) Date: Wed, 7 Feb 2018 16:53:02 +0000 Subject: [PATCH v2 05/20] arm64: capabilities: Add flags to handle the conflicts on late CPU In-Reply-To: <7221b67c-6581-93bd-ebb3-7e48736ecb02@arm.com> References: <20180131182807.32134-1-suzuki.poulose@arm.com> <20180131182807.32134-6-suzuki.poulose@arm.com> <20180207103804.GV5862@e103592.cambridge.arm.com> <7221b67c-6581-93bd-ebb3-7e48736ecb02@arm.com> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 07/02/18 11:31, Robin Murphy wrote: > On 07/02/18 10:38, Dave Martin wrote: >> On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 06:27:52PM +0000, Suzuki K Poulose wrote: ... >>> Case (b) is not permitted for errata work arounds which requires some work >>> around, which cannot be delayed. And we ignore (b) for features. Here, yet >> >> Nit, maybe: >> >> "Case (b) is not permitted for any errata workaround that cannot be >> activated if the kernel has finished booting and has not already enabled >> it." > > Nit^2: I think it would suffice to say "...that cannot be activated after the kernel has finished booting." - since we don't really have the concept of *de*activating workarounds, it is already implicit in that statement that the one in question wasn't activated *before* the kernel finished booting. Robin, Dave, I have updated the comments accordingly. Thanks a lot for the review Suzuki