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, 29 Oct 2019 11:36:07 +0000
From:   Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
To:     Julien Grall <julien.grall@arm.com>
Cc:     linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        catalin.marinas@arm.com, suzuki.poulose@arm.com,
        Dave.Martin@arm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: cpufeature: Export Armv8.6 Matrix feature to
 userspace
Message-ID: <20191029113606.GB12103@willie-the-truck>
References: <20191025171056.30641-1-julien.grall@arm.com>
 <20191029111517.GE11590@willie-the-truck>
 <f58cb01f-4543-6041-df2d-7ca7ba887bc9@arm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <f58cb01f-4543-6041-df2d-7ca7ba887bc9@arm.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 11:26:41AM +0000, Julien Grall wrote:
> On 29/10/2019 11:15, Will Deacon wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 06:10:56PM +0100, Julien Grall wrote:
> > > This patch provides support for reporting the presence of Armv8.6
> > > Matrix and its optional features to userspace.
> > 
> > Are you sure this is 8.6 and not earlier?
> 
> This was introduced by Armv8.6 see [1] but allowed to be used by Armv8.2 and
> onwards.

That doesn't mean an awful lot though, especially then the features are
referred to in the docs as things like "ARMv8.2-F64MM".

> > > @@ -227,6 +229,12 @@ infrastructure:
> > >        +------------------------------+---------+---------+
> > >        | Name                         |  bits   | visible |
> > >        +------------------------------+---------+---------+
> > > +     | F64MM                        | [56-59] |    y    |
> > > +     +------------------------------+---------+---------+
> > > +     | F32MM                        | [52-55] |    y    |
> > > +     +------------------------------+---------+---------+
> > > +     | I8MM                         | [44-47] |    y    |
> > > +     +------------------------------+---------+---------+
> > 
> > Urgh, we're inconsistent in our bitfields. Some are [lo-hi] whilst others
> > are [hi-lo]. Please can you fix that in a preparatory patch? I prefer
> > [hi-lo] and it matches the arch docs.
> 
> Sure.

Thanks.

Will