From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] kselftest/arm64: Fix enumeration of SME VLs on systems without VL 128
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2023 19:30:55 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <167527985156.975086.8487124990316370380.b4-ty@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230131-arm64-kselftest-sig-sme-no-128-v1-0-d47c13dc8e1e@kernel.org>
On Tue, 31 Jan 2023 22:56:33 +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> These two patches fix a repeated error with the way we enumerate SME
> VLs, the code for which is cut'n'pasted into each test. It's in two
> patches because the first applies to Linus' tree and the second covers a
> new test added in -next, even if they're both applied for -next now this
> should help with backporting.
>
> It would be good to factor this code out but that's a separate issue,
> I'll tackle that for the next release (along with the general fun with
> the build system in these tests).
>
> [...]
Applied to arm64 (for-next/kselftest), thanks!
[1/2] kselftest/arm64: Fix enumeration of systems without 128 bit SME
https://git.kernel.org/arm64/c/5f389238534a
[2/2] kselftest/arm64: Fix enumeration of systems without 128 bit SME for SSVE+ZA
https://git.kernel.org/arm64/c/a7db82f18cd3
--
Catalin
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc: Shuah Khan <skhan@linuxfoundation.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] kselftest/arm64: Fix enumeration of SME VLs on systems without VL 128
Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2023 19:30:55 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <167527985156.975086.8487124990316370380.b4-ty@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230131-arm64-kselftest-sig-sme-no-128-v1-0-d47c13dc8e1e@kernel.org>
On Tue, 31 Jan 2023 22:56:33 +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> These two patches fix a repeated error with the way we enumerate SME
> VLs, the code for which is cut'n'pasted into each test. It's in two
> patches because the first applies to Linus' tree and the second covers a
> new test added in -next, even if they're both applied for -next now this
> should help with backporting.
>
> It would be good to factor this code out but that's a separate issue,
> I'll tackle that for the next release (along with the general fun with
> the build system in these tests).
>
> [...]
Applied to arm64 (for-next/kselftest), thanks!
[1/2] kselftest/arm64: Fix enumeration of systems without 128 bit SME
https://git.kernel.org/arm64/c/5f389238534a
[2/2] kselftest/arm64: Fix enumeration of systems without 128 bit SME for SSVE+ZA
https://git.kernel.org/arm64/c/a7db82f18cd3
--
Catalin
_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-02-01 19:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-31 22:56 [PATCH 0/2] kselftest/arm64: Fix enumeration of SME VLs on systems without VL 128 Mark Brown
2023-01-31 22:56 ` Mark Brown
2023-01-31 22:56 ` [PATCH 1/2] kselftest/arm64: Fix enumeration of systems without 128 bit SME Mark Brown
2023-01-31 22:56 ` Mark Brown
2023-01-31 22:56 ` [PATCH 2/2] kselftest/arm64: Fix enumeration of systems without 128 bit SME for SSVE+ZA Mark Brown
2023-01-31 22:56 ` Mark Brown
2023-02-01 19:30 ` Catalin Marinas [this message]
2023-02-01 19:30 ` [PATCH 0/2] kselftest/arm64: Fix enumeration of SME VLs on systems without VL 128 Catalin Marinas
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=167527985156.975086.8487124990316370380.b4-ty@arm.com \
--to=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
--cc=broonie@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=skhan@linuxfoundation.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.