All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, marc.zyngier@arm.com,
	catalin.marinas@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux@dominikbrodowski.net,
	james.morse@arm.com, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/18] arm64: move SCTLR_EL{1,2} assertions to <asm/sysreg.h>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 11:00:53 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180514100053.GX7753@e103592.cambridge.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180514094640.27569-3-mark.rutland@arm.com>

On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:46:24AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> Currently we assert that the SCTLR_EL{1,2}_{SET,CLEAR} bits are
> self-consistent with an assertion in config_sctlr_el1(). This is a bit
> unusual, since config_sctlr_el1() doesn't make use of these definitions,
> and is far away from the definitions themselves.
> 
> We can use the CPP #error directive to have equivalent assertions in
> <asm/sysreg.h>, next to the definitions of the set/clear bits, which is
> a bit clearer and simpler.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
> Cc: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
> Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h | 14 ++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h
> index 6171178075dc..bd1d1194a5e7 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h
> @@ -452,9 +452,9 @@
>  			 SCTLR_ELx_SA     | SCTLR_ELx_I    | SCTLR_ELx_WXN | \
>  			 ENDIAN_CLEAR_EL2 | SCTLR_EL2_RES0)
>  
> -/* Check all the bits are accounted for */
> -#define SCTLR_EL2_BUILD_BUG_ON_MISSING_BITS	BUILD_BUG_ON((SCTLR_EL2_SET ^ SCTLR_EL2_CLEAR) != ~0)
> -
> +#if (SCTLR_EL2_SET ^ SCTLR_EL2_CLEAR) != 0xffffffff
> +#error "Inconsistent SCTLR_EL2 set/clear bits"
> +#endif

Can we have a comment on the != 0xffffffff versus != ~0 here?

The subtle differences in evaluation semantics between #if and
other contexts here may well trip people up during maintenance...


With that, Reviewed-by: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>

Cheers
---Dave

>  
>  /* SCTLR_EL1 specific flags. */
>  #define SCTLR_EL1_UCI		(1 << 26)
> @@ -492,8 +492,9 @@
>  			 SCTLR_EL1_UMA | SCTLR_ELx_WXN     | ENDIAN_CLEAR_EL1 |\
>  			 SCTLR_EL1_RES0)
>  
> -/* Check all the bits are accounted for */
> -#define SCTLR_EL1_BUILD_BUG_ON_MISSING_BITS	BUILD_BUG_ON((SCTLR_EL1_SET ^ SCTLR_EL1_CLEAR) != ~0)
> +#if (SCTLR_EL1_SET ^ SCTLR_EL1_CLEAR) != 0xffffffff
> +#error "Inconsistent SCTLR_EL1 set/clear bits"
> +#endif
>  
>  /* id_aa64isar0 */
>  #define ID_AA64ISAR0_TS_SHIFT		52
> @@ -732,9 +733,6 @@ static inline void config_sctlr_el1(u32 clear, u32 set)
>  {
>  	u32 val;
>  
> -	SCTLR_EL2_BUILD_BUG_ON_MISSING_BITS;
> -	SCTLR_EL1_BUILD_BUG_ON_MISSING_BITS;
> -
>  	val = read_sysreg(sctlr_el1);
>  	val &= ~clear;
>  	val |= set;
> -- 
> 2.11.0
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Dave.Martin@arm.com (Dave Martin)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 02/18] arm64: move SCTLR_EL{1,2} assertions to <asm/sysreg.h>
Date: Mon, 14 May 2018 11:00:53 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180514100053.GX7753@e103592.cambridge.arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180514094640.27569-3-mark.rutland@arm.com>

On Mon, May 14, 2018 at 10:46:24AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> Currently we assert that the SCTLR_EL{1,2}_{SET,CLEAR} bits are
> self-consistent with an assertion in config_sctlr_el1(). This is a bit
> unusual, since config_sctlr_el1() doesn't make use of these definitions,
> and is far away from the definitions themselves.
> 
> We can use the CPP #error directive to have equivalent assertions in
> <asm/sysreg.h>, next to the definitions of the set/clear bits, which is
> a bit clearer and simpler.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
> Cc: James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>
> Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
> ---
>  arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h | 14 ++++++--------
>  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h
> index 6171178075dc..bd1d1194a5e7 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/sysreg.h
> @@ -452,9 +452,9 @@
>  			 SCTLR_ELx_SA     | SCTLR_ELx_I    | SCTLR_ELx_WXN | \
>  			 ENDIAN_CLEAR_EL2 | SCTLR_EL2_RES0)
>  
> -/* Check all the bits are accounted for */
> -#define SCTLR_EL2_BUILD_BUG_ON_MISSING_BITS	BUILD_BUG_ON((SCTLR_EL2_SET ^ SCTLR_EL2_CLEAR) != ~0)
> -
> +#if (SCTLR_EL2_SET ^ SCTLR_EL2_CLEAR) != 0xffffffff
> +#error "Inconsistent SCTLR_EL2 set/clear bits"
> +#endif

Can we have a comment on the != 0xffffffff versus != ~0 here?

The subtle differences in evaluation semantics between #if and
other contexts here may well trip people up during maintenance...


With that, Reviewed-by: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>

Cheers
---Dave

>  
>  /* SCTLR_EL1 specific flags. */
>  #define SCTLR_EL1_UCI		(1 << 26)
> @@ -492,8 +492,9 @@
>  			 SCTLR_EL1_UMA | SCTLR_ELx_WXN     | ENDIAN_CLEAR_EL1 |\
>  			 SCTLR_EL1_RES0)
>  
> -/* Check all the bits are accounted for */
> -#define SCTLR_EL1_BUILD_BUG_ON_MISSING_BITS	BUILD_BUG_ON((SCTLR_EL1_SET ^ SCTLR_EL1_CLEAR) != ~0)
> +#if (SCTLR_EL1_SET ^ SCTLR_EL1_CLEAR) != 0xffffffff
> +#error "Inconsistent SCTLR_EL1 set/clear bits"
> +#endif
>  
>  /* id_aa64isar0 */
>  #define ID_AA64ISAR0_TS_SHIFT		52
> @@ -732,9 +733,6 @@ static inline void config_sctlr_el1(u32 clear, u32 set)
>  {
>  	u32 val;
>  
> -	SCTLR_EL2_BUILD_BUG_ON_MISSING_BITS;
> -	SCTLR_EL1_BUILD_BUG_ON_MISSING_BITS;
> -
>  	val = read_sysreg(sctlr_el1);
>  	val &= ~clear;
>  	val |= set;
> -- 
> 2.11.0
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> linux-arm-kernel mailing list
> linux-arm-kernel at lists.infradead.org
> http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

  reply	other threads:[~2018-05-14 10:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 126+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-05-14  9:46 [PATCH 00/18] arm64: invoke syscalls with pt_regs Mark Rutland
2018-05-14  9:46 ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-14  9:46 ` [PATCH 01/18] arm64: consistently use unsigned long for thread flags Mark Rutland
2018-05-14  9:46   ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-14  9:57   ` Dave Martin
2018-05-14  9:57     ` Dave Martin
2018-05-14  9:46 ` [PATCH 02/18] arm64: move SCTLR_EL{1,2} assertions to <asm/sysreg.h> Mark Rutland
2018-05-14  9:46   ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-14 10:00   ` Dave Martin [this message]
2018-05-14 10:00     ` Dave Martin
2018-05-14 10:08     ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-14 10:08       ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-14 11:20       ` Dave Martin
2018-05-14 11:20         ` Dave Martin
2018-05-14 11:56         ` Robin Murphy
2018-05-14 11:56           ` Robin Murphy
2018-05-14 12:06           ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-14 12:06             ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-14 12:41             ` Dave Martin
2018-05-14 12:41               ` Dave Martin
2018-05-14 13:10               ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-14 13:10                 ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-14  9:46 ` [PATCH 03/18] arm64: introduce sysreg_clear_set() Mark Rutland
2018-05-14  9:46   ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-14 10:04   ` Dave Martin
2018-05-14 10:04     ` Dave Martin
2018-05-14  9:46 ` [PATCH 04/18] arm64: kill config_sctlr_el1() Mark Rutland
2018-05-14  9:46   ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-14 10:05   ` Dave Martin
2018-05-14 10:05     ` Dave Martin
2018-05-14  9:46 ` [PATCH 05/18] arm64: kill change_cpacr() Mark Rutland
2018-05-14  9:46   ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-14 10:06   ` Dave Martin
2018-05-14 10:06     ` Dave Martin
2018-05-14  9:46 ` [PATCH 06/18] arm64: move sve_user_{enable,disable} to <asm/fpsimd.h> Mark Rutland
2018-05-14  9:46   ` [PATCH 06/18] arm64: move sve_user_{enable, disable} " Mark Rutland
2018-05-14 11:06   ` Dave Martin
2018-05-14 11:06     ` Dave Martin
2018-05-15 10:39     ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-15 10:39       ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-15 12:19       ` Dave Martin
2018-05-15 12:19         ` Dave Martin
2018-05-15 16:33         ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-15 16:33           ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-16  9:01           ` Dave Martin
2018-05-16  9:01             ` Dave Martin
2018-06-01 10:29             ` Mark Rutland
2018-06-01 10:29               ` Mark Rutland
2018-06-01 10:42               ` Dave Martin
2018-06-01 10:42                 ` Dave Martin
2018-05-14  9:46 ` [PATCH 07/18] arm64: remove sigreturn wrappers Mark Rutland
2018-05-14  9:46   ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-14 11:07   ` Dave Martin
2018-05-14 11:07     ` Dave Martin
2018-05-14  9:46 ` [PATCH 08/18] arm64: convert raw syscall invocation to C Mark Rutland
2018-05-14  9:46   ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-14 11:07   ` Dave Martin
2018-05-14 11:07     ` Dave Martin
2018-05-14 11:41     ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-14 11:41       ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-14 12:53       ` Dave Martin
2018-05-14 12:53         ` Dave Martin
2018-05-14 20:24       ` Dominik Brodowski
2018-05-14 20:24         ` Dominik Brodowski
2018-05-15  8:22         ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-15  8:22           ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-15 10:01           ` Dominik Brodowski
2018-05-15 10:01             ` Dominik Brodowski
2018-05-15 10:13             ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-15 10:13               ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-14 18:00   ` Dominik Brodowski
2018-05-14 18:00     ` Dominik Brodowski
2018-05-15  8:18     ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-15  8:18       ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-14  9:46 ` [PATCH 09/18] arm64: convert syscall trace logic " Mark Rutland
2018-05-14  9:46   ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-14  9:46 ` [PATCH 10/18] arm64: convert native/compat syscall entry " Mark Rutland
2018-05-14  9:46   ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-14 11:07   ` Dave Martin
2018-05-14 11:07     ` Dave Martin
2018-05-14 11:58     ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-14 11:58       ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-14 14:43       ` Dave Martin
2018-05-14 14:43         ` Dave Martin
2018-05-14 15:01         ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-14 15:01           ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-14  9:46 ` [PATCH 11/18] arm64: zero GPRs upon entry from EL0 Mark Rutland
2018-05-14  9:46   ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-14 11:07   ` Dave Martin
2018-05-14 11:07     ` Dave Martin
2018-05-14  9:46 ` [PATCH 12/18] kernel: add ksys_personality() Mark Rutland
2018-05-14  9:46   ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-14 11:08   ` Dave Martin
2018-05-14 11:08     ` Dave Martin
2018-05-14 12:07   ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-05-14 12:07     ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-05-15  9:56     ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-15  9:56       ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-14  9:46 ` [PATCH 13/18] kernel: add kcompat_sys_{f,}statfs64() Mark Rutland
2018-05-14  9:46   ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-14 17:14   ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-14 17:14     ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-14 20:34     ` Dominik Brodowski
2018-05-14 20:34       ` Dominik Brodowski
2018-05-15  9:53       ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-15  9:53         ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-15  9:58         ` Dominik Brodowski
2018-05-15  9:58           ` Dominik Brodowski
2018-05-14  9:46 ` [PATCH 14/18] arm64: remove in-kernel call to sys_personality() Mark Rutland
2018-05-14  9:46   ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-14  9:46 ` [PATCH 15/18] arm64: use {COMPAT,}SYSCALL_DEFINE0 for sigreturn Mark Rutland
2018-05-14  9:46   ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-14  9:46 ` [PATCH 16/18] arm64: use SYSCALL_DEFINE6() for mmap Mark Rutland
2018-05-14  9:46   ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-14  9:46 ` [PATCH 17/18] arm64: convert compat wrappers to C Mark Rutland
2018-05-14  9:46   ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-14 12:10   ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-05-14 12:10     ` Christoph Hellwig
2018-05-14 12:43     ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-14 12:43       ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-14  9:46 ` [PATCH 18/18] arm64: implement syscall wrappers Mark Rutland
2018-05-14  9:46   ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-14 20:57   ` Dominik Brodowski
2018-05-14 20:57     ` Dominik Brodowski
2018-05-15  8:37     ` Mark Rutland
2018-05-15  8:37       ` Mark Rutland

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=20180514100053.GX7753@e103592.cambridge.arm.com \
    --to=dave.martin@arm.com \
    --cc=catalin.marinas@arm.com \
    --cc=james.morse@arm.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux@dominikbrodowski.net \
    --cc=marc.zyngier@arm.com \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
    /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.