Re: [PATCH 2/7] arm64: head: correct comment for init_kernel_el()

[Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>]

On Wed, Sep 02, 2026 at 02:49:57PM +0100, Bradley Morgan wrote:
> On 2 September 2026 14:46:36 BST, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> wrote:
> >On Tue, Aug 25, 2026 at 08:58:34PM +0000, Bradley Morgan wrote:
> >> The comment above init_kernel_el() still says the function configures
> >> the CPU to execute at the highest reachable EL, but that stopped being
> >> true a while back. Ever since commit ae4b7e38e9a94798 ("arm64: Allow
> >> sticky E2H when entering EL1"), init_kernel_el() always drops to EL1,
> >> and it is finalise_el2() that brings us back up to EL2 when we want it.
> >> 
> >> Update the comment to match what the code actually does.
> >> 
> >> Signed-off-by: Bradley Morgan <brads@mainlining.org>
> >> Cc: Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@kernel.org>
> >> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
> >> Cc: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
> >> Cc: Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>
> >> Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
> >> ---
> >>  arch/arm64/kernel/head.S | 6 +++---
> >>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> >This looks to be my patch [1], but with a (partially) rewritten commit
> >message, and my S-o-B dropped.
> >
> >There was admittedly one typo in that commit message that needed to be
> >fixed, but I don't think the rest of the changes were necessary, and I
> >don't think it's approriate to drop my S-o-B.
> >
> >I think similar is true for the rest of the series. The patch fixing the
> >_cpu_resume() only seems to have a paraphrased commit message.
> >
> >[1]
> >https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mark/linux.git/commit/?id=ee4323ff6a2ba4c3989b38f13b2c1a516d6c27e4
> >
> >Mark.
> >
> >> 
> >> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/head.S b/arch/arm64/kernel/head.S
> >> index 87a822e5c4ca..c6301557eee1 100644
> >> --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/head.S
> >> +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/head.S
> >> @@ -254,9 +254,9 @@ SYM_FUNC_END(__primary_switched)
> >>  	.section ".idmap.text","a"
> >>  
> >>  /*
> >> - * Starting from EL2 or EL1, configure the CPU to execute at the
> >highest
> >> - * reachable EL supported by the kernel in a chosen default state. If
> >dropping
> >> - * from EL2 to EL1, configure EL2 before configuring EL1.
> >> + * Starting from EL2 or EL1, configure the CPU to execute at EL1.
> >> + * If dropping from EL2 to EL1, configure EL2 before configuring EL1.
> >> + * To use VHE we'll upgrade back to EL2 later in finalise_el2().
> >>   *
> >>   * Since we cannot always rely on ERET synchronizing writes to sysregs
> >(e.g. if
> >>   * SCTLR_ELx.EOS is clear), we place an ISB prior to ERET.
> >> -- 
> >> 2.47.3
> Hi mark, do you **WANT** your sob? I don't mind.

Please read Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst

The SoB lines form a chain of authorship and delivery. You *must not*
drop an SoB line.

> I dropped it because it seemed you didn't care about it (or were too
> busy),hence, yeah.

I was busy, then on holiday. Neither has any relevance to the SoB lines.

I do care about these patches, and I'm going to have to review them
regardless. The reason I hadn't posted them was that this is a subtle
area that needs careful handling.

Mark.