2023-09-25 17:26:07

by Catalin Marinas

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] arm64/sysreg: Move TRFCR definitions to sysreg

On Tue, Sep 05, 2023 at 11:21:14AM +0100, James Clark wrote:
> Add separate definitions for ELx and EL2 as TRFCR_EL1 doesn't have CX.
> This also mirrors the previous definition so no code change is required.
>
> Signed-off-by: James Clark <[email protected]>

Acked-by: Catalin Marinas <[email protected]>

I assume these patches would go in via the coresight tree.


2023-09-26 08:57:04

by James Clark

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] arm64/sysreg: Move TRFCR definitions to sysreg



On 25/09/2023 16:59, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 05, 2023 at 11:21:14AM +0100, James Clark wrote:
>> Add separate definitions for ELx and EL2 as TRFCR_EL1 doesn't have CX.
>> This also mirrors the previous definition so no code change is required.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: James Clark <[email protected]>
>
> Acked-by: Catalin Marinas <[email protected]>
>
> I assume these patches would go in via the coresight tree.

Possibly, but I'm working on a V4 that combines the nVHE version and
Suzuki's comment from here [1]. There will be more kvm patches in that
one so I'm not sure.

[1]:
https://lists.linaro.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/A6OVUHKZZXJZG5MQ2T7VYHBAD6NOSBD7/