From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1161357AbcFMRku (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Mon, 13 Jun 2016 13:40:50 -0400
Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:53763 "EHLO foss.arm.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1161225AbcFMRkt (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Mon, 13 Jun 2016 13:40:49 -0400
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] arm64: cpuinfo: Expose MIDR_EL1 and REVIDR_EL1 to
 sysfs
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
References: <1465837689-28215-1-git-send-email-suzuki.poulose@arm.com>
 <20160613172616.GC17128@leverpostej>
Cc: catalin.marinas@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        steve.capper@arm.com, linux@arm.linux.org.uk,
        Steve Capper <steve.capper@linaro.org>
From: Suzuki K Poulose <Suzuki.Poulose@arm.com>
Message-ID: <575EF01D.4020203@arm.com>
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 18:40:45 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/38.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20160613172616.GC17128@leverpostej>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On 13/06/16 18:26, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 06:08:09PM +0100, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
>> +/*
>> + * Both MIDR_EL1 and REVIDR_EL1 are 32bit registers. However, per C5.1.1,
>> + * "Principles of the System instruction class encoding" in ARM DDI 0487A.i,
>> + * when a system register is escribed as 32-bit, this only means that the
>> + * upper 32 bits are RES0, not that they will never be made use of. To avoid
>> + * changing the ABI for the future, the values are exported as 64bit values.
>> + */
>
> I see this is a direct copy+paste of my earlier message, typo and all.

>
> I'd prefer something like the below:
>
> /*
>   * The ARM ARM uses the phrase "32-bit register" to describe a register
>   * whose upper 32 bits are RES0 (per C5.1.1, ARM DDI 0487A.i), however
>   * no statement is made as to whether the upper 32 bits will or will not
>   * be made use of in future, and between ARM DDI 0487A.c and ARM DDI
>   * 0487A.d CLIDR_EL1 was expanded from 32-bit to 64-bit.
>   *
>   * Thus, while both MIDR_EL1 and REVIDR_EL1 are described as 32-bit
>   * registers, we expose them both as 64 bit values to cater for possible
>   * future expansion without an ABI break.
>   */

Sorry about that, will fix it.