Received: by 2002:ac0:a594:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id m20-v6csp3297246imm; Fri, 25 May 2018 03:18:12 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AB8JxZoHzmebzs58n/vG5ZuHOzJ/cT6u9A0m2exxOhKnCsu6e3EUCamnwfB4AHJKPHnhKf+tsni7 X-Received: by 2002:a65:65ce:: with SMTP id y14-v6mr1492135pgv.270.1527243492039; Fri, 25 May 2018 03:18:12 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1527243492; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=vA87Y4c6eY9W3g7Wzpcw1FILWgKcB9vtWpkL1FC+bnwZ65PrWA73PwZx7issOoGB3O mAZM4GiyzrC11AlKpWNX4SDnbQIMTv5b3qXjbODz3p27EPz3PzF4KYBxEpH977AF5IsN EN8u/+v1dO+6AL8rH0Wg6y0bRJKx/wLndXyI0kbnrAFucxjRocR/Lr7+i+ocTqUaiVXt NOCHeTLeVZDTpsOAvTqYFAHAJhBuHGEOO1OvLkWM6Izl1dQ4mzZzNEZcEvF1O+S431xY kmC1mff5PJk9R3aitMEQzmRYdm45pV3nJOjyaEpzZ2Kct4TVc91XO3VIHnisizAUV6xX 9UhA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:content-transfer-encoding :content-language:in-reply-to:mime-version:user-agent:date :message-id:from:references:cc:to:subject:arc-authentication-results; bh=kmaK3LSc21jt5p9G6rO6U0PtW2idMC4guvFY6gG9jAo=; b=EUUHo8LQkokfMHU0mu+tnIvaUsLzrbtBP5guSymhuCZE+AkESiGoDjMFFJTRaNrqcR 3M+8Kmgr08vconlMVN/Kf8pAWL0GWviqCBSW1CAqDu/WC5yIcl+kyRVhoEntuLnj8LIO lH8WLk6HT6d1oY+X9JQM4HSkpNmPtYE+cLb3uHzwDd5TFLjfBuyb99oVbOERP+k6pyRm DMh3Mnda9R3xRzXP9cotsTu9vZ54OQDcAuk/7jpDFTvYnwsAh4HehLk3llGDuiY/5hyJ inzp4rVUoYQyBtR8ojQ6LjxG+qHP7tdeDPiMoMacFcA7d63950Go0FcGH0N7Ztmbnz3Q oiew== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id c84-v6si22447994pfd.89.2018.05.25.03.17.57; Fri, 25 May 2018 03:18:12 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965549AbeEYKRt (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 25 May 2018 06:17:49 -0400 Received: from usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:58638 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S936026AbeEYKRs (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 May 2018 06:17:48 -0400 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.72.51.249]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75AD280D; Fri, 25 May 2018 03:17:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.1.206.24] (e112298-lin.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.206.24]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 942043F578; Fri, 25 May 2018 03:17:46 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 02/26] arm64: cpufeature: Add cpufeature for IRQ priority masking To: Suzuki K Poulose , linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, daniel.thompson@linaro.org, joel@joelfernandes.org, marc.zyngier@arm.com, mark.rutland@arm.com, christoffer.dall@arm.com, james.morse@arm.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, will.deacon@arm.com References: <1527241772-48007-1-git-send-email-julien.thierry@arm.com> <1527241772-48007-3-git-send-email-julien.thierry@arm.com> From: Julien Thierry Message-ID: Date: Fri, 25 May 2018 11:17:45 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 25/05/18 11:04, Suzuki K Poulose wrote: > On 25/05/18 10:49, Julien Thierry wrote: >> Add a cpufeature indicating whether a cpu supports masking interrupts >> by priority. > > How is this different from the SYSREG_GIC_CPUIF cap ? Is it just > the description ? More or less. It is just to have an easier condition in the rest of the series. Basically the PRIO masking feature is enabled if we have a GICv3 CPUIF working *and* the option was selected at build time. Before this meant that I was checking for the GIC_CPUIF cap inside #ifdefs (and putting alternatives depending on that inside #ifdefs as well). Having this as a separate feature feels easier to manage in the code. It also makes it clearer at boot time that the kernel will be using irq priorities (although I admit it was not the initial intention): [ 0.000000] CPU features: detected: IRQ priority masking But yes that new feature will be detected only if SYSREG_GIC_CPUIF gets detected as well. Cheers, -- Julien Thierry