[lkml]   [2018]   [Feb]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 16/20] arm64: Handle shared capability entries
On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 06:28:03PM +0000, Suzuki K Poulose wrote:
> Some capabilities have different criteria for detection and associated
> actions based on the matching criteria, even though they all share the
> same capability bit. So far we have used multiple entries with the same
> capability bit to handle this. This is prone to errors, as the
> cpu_enable is invoked for each entry, irrespective of whether the
> detection rule applies to the CPU or not. And also this complicates
> other helpers, e.g, __this_cpu_has_cap.
> This patch adds a wrapper entry to cover all the possible variations
> of a capability and ensures :
> 1) The capabilitiy is set when at least one of the entry detects
> 2) Action is only taken for the entries that detects.
> This avoids explicit checks in the call backs. The only constraint
> here is that, all the entries should have the same "type".
> Cc: Dave Martin <>
> Cc: Will Deacon <>
> Cc: Mark Rutland <>
> Signed-off-by: Suzuki K Poulose <>
> ---


> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c


> @@ -1275,7 +1274,7 @@ static bool __verify_local_cpu_caps(const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *caps_li
> if (!(caps->type & scope_mask))
> continue;
> - cpu_has_cap = __this_cpu_has_cap(caps_list, caps->capability);
> + cpu_has_cap = caps->matches(caps, SCOPE_LOCAL_CPU);

One other minor thing: the original caps_list argument seems no longer
to be needed in this function after this change.

Can we rename the caps_list argument to "caps" and remove the local
variable of the same name?


 \ /
  Last update: 2018-02-08 13:04    [W:0.383 / U:2.268 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site