From: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
To: broonie@kernel.org, will@kernel.org, catalin.marinas@arm.com
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] arm64: Clarify when cpu_enable() is called
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2019 14:57:07 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e94ce1d2-30ad-a365-9461-cb27c07eced7@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190808135328.12655-1-broonie@kernel.org>
On 08/08/2019 14:53, Mark Brown wrote:
> Strengthen the wording in the documentation for cpu_enable() to make it
> more obvious to readers not already familiar with the code when the core
> will call this callback and that this is intentional.
>
Looks good to me, except for some minor space related issues below.
> Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
> ---
>
> v2: Much more verbose wording from Suzuki.
>
> arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h | 14 +++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h
> index cf65a47ee6b4..2447d4afbf54 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h
> @@ -289,9 +289,17 @@ struct arm64_cpu_capabilities {
> u16 type;
> bool (*matches)(const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *caps, int scope);
> /*
> - * Take the appropriate actions to enable this capability for this CPU.
> - * For each successfully booted CPU, this method is called for each
> - * globally detected capability.
> + * Take the appropriate actions to configure this capability
> + * for this CPU. If the capability is detected by the kernel
minor nit: double space ^^
> + * this will be called on all the CPUs in the system,
> + * including the hotplugged CPUs, regardless of if the
> + * capability was *available* on that specific CPU. This is
> + * useful for some capabilities (e.g, working around CPU
> + * errata), where all the CPUs must take some action (e.g,
> + * changing system control/configuration). Thus, if an action
and here before "Thus".
> + * is required only if the CPU has the capability then the
> + * routine must check it before taking any action.
> +
spurious new line ?
> */
> void (*cpu_enable)(const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *cap);
> union {
>
With the above addressed,
Reviewed-by: Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-08 13:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-08 13:53 [PATCH v2] arm64: Clarify when cpu_enable() is called Mark Brown
2019-08-08 13:57 ` Suzuki K Poulose [this message]
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=e94ce1d2-30ad-a365-9461-cb27c07eced7@arm.com \
--to=suzuki.poulose@arm.com \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--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