Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752512AbcC2IdA (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Mar 2016 04:33:00 -0400 Received: from mx-rz-1.rrze.uni-erlangen.de ([131.188.11.20]:37514 "EHLO mx-rz-1.rrze.uni-erlangen.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751476AbcC2Icz (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Mar 2016 04:32:55 -0400 Authentication-Results: mx-rz-1.rrze.uni-erlangen.de; dkim=none reason="no signature"; dkim-adsp=none (unprotected policy); dkim-atps=neutral X-RRZE-Submit-IP: 91.213.8.84 Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 10:29:11 +0200 From: Jonas Rabenstein To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux@arm.linux.org.uk, arnd@arndb.de Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm: remove tautologic #ifdefs in proc-v7-3level.S Message-ID: <20160329082911.GG20211@studium.uni-erlangen.de> References: <1459237071-13842-1-git-send-email-jonas.rabenstein@studium.uni-erlangen.de> <3570872.7QPkonuD2y@wuerfel> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3570872.7QPkonuD2y@wuerfel> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1414 Lines: 33 On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 10:05:58AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote: > On Tuesday 29 March 2016 09:37:51 Jonas Rabenstein wrote: > > The file arch/arm/mm/proc-v7-3level.S is only used by the #include > > directive in arch/arm/mm/proc-v7.S:23. This #include is conditional and > > depends on CONFIG_ARM_LPAE (otherwise proc-v7-2level.S is used). > > CONFIG_ARM_LPAE has a dependency on CONFIG_MMU defined in Kconfig. > > Consequently, checks for CONFIG_MMU in proc-v7-3level.S are superfluous. > > > > Signed-off-by: Jonas Rabenstein > > --- > > I detected the issue with chimaera, a tool I currently develop for my bachelor > > thesis extending the undertaker tool suite (https://undertaker.cs.fau.de). > > Nice catch! > > Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann > > I guess you should submit the same thing for the other file as well, > either in the same patch or as a series. I do not get, what you mean with 'the other file'? For the proc-v7-2level.S this precondition does not hold, as proc-v7-2level.S is included if !CONFIG_ARM_LPAE. Consequently, no evidence about the MMU state is available in their. > You can also add > > Fixes: 8d2cd3a38fd6 ("ARM: LPAE: Factor out classic-MMU specific code into proc-v7-2level.S") Shouldn't it be: Fixes: 1b6ba46b7efa ("ARM: LPAE: MMU setup for the 3-level page table format")? Thanks for your help and advice, Jonas