Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Sat, 8 Oct 2022 14:06:00 +0100
From:   Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org>
To:     Jisheng Zhang <jszhang@kernel.org>
Cc:     Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
        Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
        linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] riscv: move riscv_noncoherent_supported() out of
 ZICBOM probe
Message-ID: <Y0F1uH71Ll7YGygB@spud>
References: <20221006070818.3616-1-jszhang@kernel.org>
 <20221006070818.3616-2-jszhang@kernel.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20221006070818.3616-2-jszhang@kernel.org>
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Oct 06, 2022 at 03:08:11PM +0800, Jisheng Zhang wrote:
> It's a bit wired to call riscv_noncoherent_supported() once when
> insmod a module. Move the calling out of feature patch func.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jisheng Zhang <jszhang@kernel.org>
> ---
>  arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c | 7 +------
>  arch/riscv/kernel/setup.c      | 4 ++++
>  2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
> index 3b5583db9d80..03611b3ef45e 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
> @@ -272,12 +272,7 @@ static bool __init_or_module cpufeature_probe_zicbom(unsigned int stage)
>  	case RISCV_ALTERNATIVES_EARLY_BOOT:
>  		return false;
>  	default:
> -		if (riscv_isa_extension_available(NULL, ZICBOM)) {
> -			riscv_noncoherent_supported();
> -			return true;
> -		} else {
> -			return false;
> -		}
> +		return riscv_isa_extension_available(NULL, ZICBOM);
>  	}
>  #endif
>  
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/setup.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/setup.c
> index 2dfc463b86bb..1a055c3f5d9d 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/setup.c
> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/setup.c
> @@ -299,6 +299,10 @@ void __init setup_arch(char **cmdline_p)
>  	riscv_init_cbom_blocksize();
>  	riscv_fill_hwcap();
>  	apply_boot_alternatives();
> +#ifdef CONFIG_RISCV_DMA_NONCOHERENT
> +	if (riscv_isa_extension_available(NULL, ZICBOM))
> +		riscv_noncoherent_supported();
> +#endif

I have a personal bias against ifdefs where possible, maybe @Heiko
remembers why riscv_noncoherent_supported() was not defined as something
like `void riscv_noncoherent_support(void){}` for when that CONFIG is
not enabled? If it was this could become a an IS_ENABLED & we wouldn't
have to be so careful about wrapping it's usage in ifdefs.

Your change in isolation makes sense to me though, so:
Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>

Thanks,
Conor.

>  }
>  
>  static int __init topology_init(void)
> -- 
> 2.37.2
>