From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from sinmsgout01.his.huawei.com (sinmsgout01.his.huawei.com [119.8.177.36]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 205D134A788 for ; Tue, 27 Jan 2026 11:46:19 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=119.8.177.36 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769514382; cv=none; b=V1W9O3DQKsoJJMbP7wntXRcCQYWfbCDDPqpfSZULBn76w2UlBCNhlXwcrMfdoKCPKopo2TjZYx6bTDE0MVR5L1IarAjI3nuU0NecXX5qC2SaXwdp1iLBinUZWsCfIueOHQpwi1D2QsV091SaReBkHFh+7y8iPa7kr6Bkksym244= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769514382; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ZayHtE2L4RfrGNvf/G5mOkRDZhfiinnQrZvT9f+Nk50=; h=Date:From:To:CC:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=mLJD8KVWKqpmRAauRjYyJVgoWXBSgSoBWmevbGz0zA9eufokG5+mGlR9B1bscTo2EAi4IqLuDokxjnifu3U7pkU8gDBCy7ob/J4Tr87pHcQmF3mE8niOeXdhNkYKu6Zpl6PeCmSQp3i9Hb8K/+15vOH19RRu2XYoMvjX2zAvMRc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=huawei.com header.i=@huawei.com header.b=go5nMwrR; arc=none smtp.client-ip=119.8.177.36 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=huawei.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=huawei.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=huawei.com header.i=@huawei.com header.b="go5nMwrR" dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=huawei.com; s=dkim; c=relaxed/relaxed; q=dns/txt; h=From; bh=QUbY/SueKFHa9keFtxArUQDFQcITAX/e20JYSG+UB9U=; b=go5nMwrRyShR3qglbfKoYU3ZVepZPkpXMEWfbRRX49Myxs03s2ydWHEvSu/hlzAhzPeldz606 k7wuUmJykSSmuWa4EXwFwIqIcWAdiQfdN+7hB6NnWxWTF+CGg9uSfGzer92sXZcVl/1UhQgOZFC 13k0/Rp1fi/iGNWGncmmsT0= Received: from frasgout.his.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.146.33]) by sinmsgout01.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTPS id 4f0k7l07phz1P6n8; Tue, 27 Jan 2026 19:43:46 +0800 (CST) Received: from mail.maildlp.com (unknown [172.18.224.107]) by frasgout.his.huawei.com (SkyGuard) with ESMTPS id 4f0k9s5Yd2zJ46dp; Tue, 27 Jan 2026 19:45:37 +0800 (CST) Received: from dubpeml500005.china.huawei.com (unknown [7.214.145.207]) by mail.maildlp.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C12940570; Tue, 27 Jan 2026 19:46:13 +0800 (CST) Received: from localhost (10.203.177.15) by dubpeml500005.china.huawei.com (7.214.145.207) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.2.1544.11; Tue, 27 Jan 2026 11:46:12 +0000 Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2026 11:46:11 +0000 From: Jonathan Cameron To: Ryan Roberts CC: Will Deacon , Ard Biesheuvel , Catalin Marinas , Mark Rutland , Linus Torvalds , Oliver Upton , Marc Zyngier , "Dev Jain" , Linu Cherian , , Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 05/13] arm64: mm: Inline __TLBI_VADDR_RANGE() into __tlbi_range() Message-ID: <20260127114611.0000381e@huawei.com> In-Reply-To: <20260119172202.1681510-6-ryan.roberts@arm.com> References: <20260119172202.1681510-1-ryan.roberts@arm.com> <20260119172202.1681510-6-ryan.roberts@arm.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 4.3.0 (GTK 3.24.42; x86_64-w64-mingw32) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ClientProxiedBy: lhrpeml500010.china.huawei.com (7.191.174.240) To dubpeml500005.china.huawei.com (7.214.145.207) On Mon, 19 Jan 2026 17:21:52 +0000 Ryan Roberts wrote: > From: Will Deacon > > The __TLBI_VADDR_RANGE() macro is only used in one place and isn't > something that's generally useful outside of the low-level range > invalidation gubbins. > > Inline __TLBI_VADDR_RANGE() into the __tlbi_range() function so that the > macro can be removed entirely. > > Signed-off-by: Will Deacon > Reviewed-by: Linu Cherian > Signed-off-by: Ryan Roberts There were some oddly complex constructs in the original macro like the handling of ttl == 0, so good those got cleaned up in the passing. Reviewed-by: Jonathan Cameron