From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80059C4332F for ; Fri, 28 Jan 2022 13:11:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id ED17C6B00A2; Fri, 28 Jan 2022 08:10:18 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id E098A6B00A4; Fri, 28 Jan 2022 08:10:18 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id D1F7D6B00A6; Fri, 28 Jan 2022 08:10:18 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0058.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.58]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BD4F96B00A2 for ; Fri, 28 Jan 2022 08:10:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin20.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7622918189509 for ; Fri, 28 Jan 2022 13:10:18 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 79079729316.20.1BA805F Received: from casper.infradead.org (casper.infradead.org [90.155.50.34]) by imf29.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B814A12000B for ; Fri, 28 Jan 2022 13:10:17 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=infradead.org; s=casper.20170209; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID:Subject:Cc:To:From:Date: Sender:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description; bh=dSfLUGYv4E6j5ZfEuP1bDYMKuO4xSZnMF479I4hHJhg=; b=n2L1lUt8O9GCnrz0w20k0x4D3S r69UE7eAcE7eZ57R4NE9e/IER0mID5oZE/5QxWUrkCLnN4Lcfw8QccCbxymFeBwvKebtd1VkZgAZs KPLVGcdRIvoPh0EWAb22W7DHIXUgAo74B2BW4lI7YTHTL/6E2TV8gO124GdjTTxTKJRPfFJsL1ST/ jh7yuSmq+9MI03t2admG0M2BD+UvhV8okeJjAo/lGC2RL+koaLiYnfJhTtuRiweQC5KYZ7VboGo0o /WBjAQpDPJ3i73PSWUum8p3gmIOabL/5BZ/CykjJfysYW86b6gsd9Hn5TUywGvfqT75aDUjksVXPs 4bHcjOOg==; Received: from willy by casper.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.94.2 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1nDR13-006PoW-EX; Fri, 28 Jan 2022 13:10:13 +0000 Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2022 13:10:13 +0000 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Karolina Drobnik Cc: linux-mm@kvack.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, mike.rapoport@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/16] tools/include: Add cache.h stub Message-ID: References: <066fa177642ce6907df06819676cd29c0745e816.camel@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <066fa177642ce6907df06819676cd29c0745e816.camel@gmail.com> X-Stat-Signature: 5e5hifabwr59oexf1czrpnpatbq3rj3f X-Rspam-User: nil Authentication-Results: imf29.hostedemail.com; dkim=pass header.d=infradead.org header.s=casper.20170209 header.b=n2L1lUt8; spf=none (imf29.hostedemail.com: domain of willy@infradead.org has no SPF policy when checking 90.155.50.34) smtp.mailfrom=willy@infradead.org; dmarc=none X-Rspamd-Server: rspam02 X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: B814A12000B X-HE-Tag: 1643375417-49403 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.060702, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Fri, Jan 28, 2022 at 12:13:54PM +0100, Karolina Drobnik wrote: > On Thu, 2022-01-27 at 14:00 +0000, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 02:21:24PM +0100, Karolina Drobnik wrote: > > > +++ b/tools/include/linux/cache.h > > > @@ -0,0 +1,10 @@ > > > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 */ > > > +#ifndef _TOOLS_LINUX_CACHE_H > > > +#define _TOOLS_LINUX_CACHE_H > > > + > > > +#define L1_CACHE_SHIFT=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A05 > > > +#define L1_CACHE_BYTES=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0BIT(L1_CACHE_SHIF= T) > > > + > > > +#define SMP_CACHE_BYTES L1_CACHE_BYTES > > > + > > > +#endif > >=20 > > You've added an implicit dependency on include/vdso/bits.h which > > seems > > unpleasant ... >=20 > I'll admit that I just tried to make checkpatch.pl happy with this > change. But you're right, adding such a dependency is undesirable. I > can define it as (1 << L1_CACHE_SHIFT) and ignore the warning. >=20 > Is it fine to do so for tools/testing code? checkpatch warnings are recommendations. Only fix checkpatch errors.