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;
Date:   Tue, 15 Jan 2019 05:56:39 -0800
From:   Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
To:     Atish Patra <atish.patra@wdc.com>
Cc:     linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
        Patrick =?iso-8859-1?Q?St=E4hlin?= <me@packi.ch>,
        Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
        Jason Cooper <jason@lakedaemon.net>,
        Alan Kao <alankao@andestech.com>,
        Dmitriy Cherkasov <dmitriy@oss-tech.org>,
        Anup Patel <anup@brainfault.org>,
        Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Michael Clark <michaeljclark@mac.com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com>,
        Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de>,
        Marc Zyngier <marc.zyngier@arm.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Zong Li <zongbox@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 8/8] RISC-V: Assign hwcap only according to current
 cpu.
Message-ID: <20190115135639.GH28946@infradead.org>
References: <1546940318-9752-1-git-send-email-atish.patra@wdc.com>
 <1546940318-9752-9-git-send-email-atish.patra@wdc.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1546940318-9752-9-git-send-email-atish.patra@wdc.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Jan 08, 2019 at 01:38:38AM -0800, Atish Patra wrote:
> Currently, we set hwcap based on first valid cpu from
> DT. This may not be correct always as that CPU might not
> be current booting cpu.
> 
> Set hwcap based on the current cpu instead of first
> valid CPU from DT.

This is generally the right thing to do.  But can the kernel even cope
with different hwcaps per hart?  I know arm land and I think x86 as well
don't, so we might want to add a sanity check that they match or reduce
them to the common subset.