From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751527AbbJaWRe (ORCPT ); Sat, 31 Oct 2015 18:17:34 -0400 Received: from ozlabs.org ([103.22.144.67]:38166 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750783AbbJaWRa (ORCPT ); Sat, 31 Oct 2015 18:17:30 -0400 Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2015 09:17:24 +1100 From: Stephen Rothwell To: Catalin Marinas Cc: "Suzuki K. Poulose" , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , Peter Zijlstra , linux-next@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Marc Zyngier Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the tip tree with the arm64 tree Message-ID: <20151101091724.35e04b97@canb.auug.org.au> In-Reply-To: <20151022153201.GD26603@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com> References: <20151022132652.611ec628@canb.auug.org.au> <20151022120602.GB28575@e106634-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <20151022153201.GD26603@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.13.0 (GTK+ 2.24.28; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Catalin, On Thu, 22 Oct 2015 16:32:01 +0100 Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 01:06:03PM +0100, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 01:26:52PM +1100, Stephen Rothwell wrote: > > > Today's linux-next merge of the tip tree got a conflict in: > > > > > > arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c > > > > > > between commit: > > > > > > da8d02d19ffd ("arm64/capabilities: Make use of system wide safe value") > > > > > > from the arm64 tree and commit: > > > > > > 963fcd409587 ("arm64: cpufeatures: Check ICC_EL1_SRE.SRE before enabling ARM64_HAS_SYSREG_GIC_CPUIF") > > > > > > from the tip tree. > > > > > > I fixed it up (I have no idea here, so I just used the arm64 tree version) > > > and can carry the fix as necessary (no action is required). > > > > We need the following patch applied to fix the conflict correctly > > on top of the -next tree. > > Or, if it's easier, the combined diff resolution for the conflicting > code: > > --------8<---------------------------- > diff --cc arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c > index d0d607452e1d,305f30dc9e63..ec552cf9e12d > --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c > +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/cpufeature.c > > [...] > > > + static bool has_useable_gicv3_cpuif(const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities *entry) > + { > + bool has_sre; > + > - if (!has_id_aa64pfr0_feature(entry)) > ++ if (!has_cpuid_feature(entry)) > + return false; > + > + has_sre = gic_enable_sre(); > + if (!has_sre) > + pr_warn_once("%s present but disabled by higher exception level\n", > + entry->desc); > + > + return has_sre; > + } > + > static const struct arm64_cpu_capabilities arm64_features[] = { > { > .desc = "GIC system register CPU interface", > .capability = ARM64_HAS_SYSREG_GIC_CPUIF, > - .matches = has_cpuid_feature, > + .matches = has_useable_gicv3_cpuif, > - .field_pos = 24, > + .sys_reg = SYS_ID_AA64PFR0_EL1, > + .field_pos = ID_AA64PFR0_GIC_SHIFT, > .min_field_value = 1, > }, > #ifdef CONFIG_ARM64_PAN OK, I have updated my merge resolution. -- Cheers, Stephen Rothwell sfr@canb.auug.org.au