| Message ID | 20241008140121.2774348-1-joey.gouly@arm.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [v1] arm64: cpufeature: add POE to cpucap_is_possible() | expand |
On Tue, Oct 08, 2024 at 03:01:21PM +0100, Joey Gouly wrote: > Since de66cb37ab6 ("arm64: Add cpucap_is_possible()"), > alternative_has_cap_unlikely() includes the IS_ENABLED() check. > > Add CONFIG_ARM64_POE to cpucap_is_possible() to avoid the explicit check. > > Signed-off-by: Joey Gouly <joey.gouly@arm.com> > Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> > Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org> > --- > > Small cosmetic change I noticed when looking at some other patches. > > arch/arm64/include/asm/cpucaps.h | 2 ++ > arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h | 3 +-- > 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpucaps.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpucaps.h > index a6e5b07b64fd..a08a1212ffbb 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpucaps.h > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpucaps.h > @@ -42,6 +42,8 @@ cpucap_is_possible(const unsigned int cap) > return IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM64_BTI); > case ARM64_HAS_TLB_RANGE: > return IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM64_TLB_RANGE); > + case ARM64_HAS_S1POE: > + return IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM64_POE); > case ARM64_UNMAP_KERNEL_AT_EL0: > return IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_UNMAP_KERNEL_AT_EL0); > case ARM64_WORKAROUND_843419: > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h > index 3d261cc123c1..4b6bc0bac9b9 100644 > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h > @@ -834,8 +834,7 @@ static inline bool system_supports_lpa2(void) > > static inline bool system_supports_poe(void) > { > - return IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM64_POE) && > - alternative_has_cap_unlikely(ARM64_HAS_S1POE); > + return alternative_has_cap_unlikely(ARM64_HAS_S1POE); > } > > int do_emulate_mrs(struct pt_regs *regs, u32 sys_reg, u32 rt); > -- > 2.25.1 Acked-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org> Will
On Tue, 08 Oct 2024 15:01:21 +0100, Joey Gouly wrote: > Since de66cb37ab6 ("arm64: Add cpucap_is_possible()"), > alternative_has_cap_unlikely() includes the IS_ENABLED() check. > > Add CONFIG_ARM64_POE to cpucap_is_possible() to avoid the explicit check. > > Applied to arm64 (for-next/misc), thanks! [1/1] arm64: cpufeature: add POE to cpucap_is_possible() https://git.kernel.org/arm64/c/9c4a25140dee
diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpucaps.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpucaps.h index a6e5b07b64fd..a08a1212ffbb 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpucaps.h +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpucaps.h @@ -42,6 +42,8 @@ cpucap_is_possible(const unsigned int cap) return IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM64_BTI); case ARM64_HAS_TLB_RANGE: return IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM64_TLB_RANGE); + case ARM64_HAS_S1POE: + return IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM64_POE); case ARM64_UNMAP_KERNEL_AT_EL0: return IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_UNMAP_KERNEL_AT_EL0); case ARM64_WORKAROUND_843419: diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h index 3d261cc123c1..4b6bc0bac9b9 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h @@ -834,8 +834,7 @@ static inline bool system_supports_lpa2(void) static inline bool system_supports_poe(void) { - return IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM64_POE) && - alternative_has_cap_unlikely(ARM64_HAS_S1POE); + return alternative_has_cap_unlikely(ARM64_HAS_S1POE); } int do_emulate_mrs(struct pt_regs *regs, u32 sys_reg, u32 rt);
Since de66cb37ab6 ("arm64: Add cpucap_is_possible()"), alternative_has_cap_unlikely() includes the IS_ENABLED() check. Add CONFIG_ARM64_POE to cpucap_is_possible() to avoid the explicit check. Signed-off-by: Joey Gouly <joey.gouly@arm.com> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com> Cc: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org> --- Small cosmetic change I noticed when looking at some other patches. arch/arm64/include/asm/cpucaps.h | 2 ++ arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h | 3 +-- 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)