Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-77441-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.48.161 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.48.161;
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>
To: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
	Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
Cc: Dave Martin <Dave.Martin@arm.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] arm64/sve: Document that __SVE_VQ_MAX is much larger than needed
Date: Thu, 22 Feb 2024 22:05:08 +0000
Message-Id: <170863948635.1616990.16270415841585916103.b4-ty@arm.com>
In-Reply-To: <20240209-arm64-sve-vl-max-comment-v2-1-111b283469ee@kernel.org>
References: <20240209-arm64-sve-vl-max-comment-v2-1-111b283469ee@kernel.org>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

On Fri, 09 Feb 2024 16:53:36 +0000, Mark Brown wrote:
> __SVE_VQ_MAX is defined without comment as 512 but the actual
> architectural maximum is 16, a substantial difference which might not
> be obvious to readers especially given the several different units used
> for specifying vector sizes in various contexts and the fact that it's
> often used via macros.  In an effort to minimise surprises for users who
> might assume the value is the architectural maximum and use it to do
> things like size allocations add a comment noting the difference, and
> add a note for SVE_VQ_MAX to aid discoverability.
> 
> [...]

Applied to arm64 (for-next/misc), thanks!

[1/1] arm64/sve: Document that __SVE_VQ_MAX is much larger than needed
      https://git.kernel.org/arm64/c/21eb468e9fc1

-- 
Catalin