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:   Wed, 5 Apr 2023 17:37:01 +0200
From:   Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com>
To:     Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org>
Cc:     Sunil V L <sunilvl@ventanamicro.com>, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
        linux-acpi@vger.kernel.org, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org,
        platform-driver-x86@vger.kernel.org, llvm@lists.linux.dev,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@intel.com>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael@kernel.org>,
        Tom Rix <trix@redhat.com>, Weili Qian <qianweili@huawei.com>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
        Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>,
        Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
        Daniel Lezcano <daniel.lezcano@linaro.org>,
        Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
        Mark Gross <markgross@kernel.org>,
        Hans de Goede <hdegoede@redhat.com>,
        Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Nathan Chancellor <nathan@kernel.org>,
        Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@google.com>,
        Zhou Wang <wangzhou1@hisilicon.com>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
        Len Brown <lenb@kernel.org>,
        Maximilian Luz <luzmaximilian@gmail.com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH V4 13/23] RISC-V: cpufeature: Add ACPI support in
 riscv_fill_hwcap()
Message-ID: <fajw3nx5d6u32qvsb2uaysayiadqf5eelfjxc4lokjcrsvddad@cfyp2gwviocd>
References: <20230404182037.863533-1-sunilvl@ventanamicro.com>
 <20230404182037.863533-14-sunilvl@ventanamicro.com>
 <20230404-promotion-scarce-7c69ff7e5f99@spud>
 <ZC15LqYqLzmiVdcr@sunil-laptop>
 <20230405-compel-slinky-2fe11b4bf0b3@spud>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230405-compel-slinky-2fe11b4bf0b3@spud>
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 03:31:24PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 05, 2023 at 07:05:42PM +0530, Sunil V L wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 04, 2023 at 09:57:19PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > > On Tue, Apr 04, 2023 at 11:50:27PM +0530, Sunil V L wrote:
...
> > > > -		if (of_property_read_string(node, "riscv,isa", &isa)) {
> > > > -			pr_warn("Unable to find \"riscv,isa\" devicetree entry\n");
> > > > -			continue;
> > > > +		if (acpi_disabled) {
> > > > +			node = of_cpu_device_node_get(cpu);
> > > > +			if (node) {
> > > > +				rc = of_property_read_string(node, "riscv,isa", &isa);
> > > 
> > > Hmm, after digging in the previous patch, I think this is actually not
> > > possible to fail? We already validated it when setting up the mask of
> > > possible cpus, but I think leaving the error handling here makes things
> > > a lot more obvious.
> > > 
> > Yeah, do you prefer to merge these patches again since only in this
> > patch, we change the loop to for_each_possible_cpu() from
> > for_each_of_cpu_node() which actually makes riscv_of_processor_hartid()
> > not useful?
> 
> Yah, all 3 of us mistakenly thought that that was an unrelated cleanup
> on the last revision, but clearly it is not.
> Squash it back IMO, sorry for my part in the extra work generated.

Yup, please squash back in. Sorry about that, Sunil!

drew