Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-202663-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:4601:e00::3 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:4601:e00::3;
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2024 13:56:19 +0100
From: Mark Brown <broonie@kernel.org>
To: Fuad Tabba <tabba@google.com>
Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
	Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Marc Zyngier <maz@kernel.org>,
	Oliver Upton <oliver.upton@linux.dev>,
	James Morse <james.morse@arm.com>,
	Suzuki K Poulose <suzuki.poulose@arm.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	kvmarm@lists.linux.dev
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] arm64/fpsimd: Discover maximum vector length
 implemented by any CPU
Message-ID: <50d3d9d3-50f2-4c95-a481-6e744ae17099@sirena.org.uk>
References: <20240605-kvm-arm64-fix-pkvm-sve-vl-v1-0-680d6b43b4c1@kernel.org>
 <20240605-kvm-arm64-fix-pkvm-sve-vl-v1-2-680d6b43b4c1@kernel.org>
 <CA+EHjTyGWu-5JQjhit310VY8fOeVZ1Ht7cbfYoF-AUi0yEDJYA@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512;
	protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="dPsNrGbRL7TTHtEY"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CA+EHjTyGWu-5JQjhit310VY8fOeVZ1Ht7cbfYoF-AUi0yEDJYA@mail.gmail.com>


--dPsNrGbRL7TTHtEY
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline

On Wed, Jun 05, 2024 at 01:03:16PM +0100, Fuad Tabba wrote:

> Actually, I was working on fixing it and was about to send this, which
> I think might be a bit simpler than what you have. Let me know what
> you think and I'll send it as a proper patch if you agree:

> +
> +               if (!max_vl)
> +                       max_vl = vl;
>         }
> +
> +       info->max_system_vl = max((int) max_vl, info->max_system_vl);

Yeah, I originally had written something like this (just doing the max
in the original assignment rather than staging in a local variable) but
it didn't feel great and like it was more vulnerable to getting missed
if we do more parallel bringup so I switched to keeping the split
between enumeration and integration.

I do also prefer the _cpu_ naming since _system_ could be read as the
maximum that we're actually using in the system, as with any naming
thing it's all a bit bikesheddy.

>         if (system_supports_sve()) {
>                 kvm_sve_max_vl = sve_max_virtualisable_vl();
> -               kvm_host_sve_max_vl = sve_max_vl();
> +               kvm_host_sve_max_vl = vl_info[ARM64_VEC_SVE].max_system_vl;

We should keep the accessor functions, it's more consistent and supports
refactoring.

--dPsNrGbRL7TTHtEY
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iQEzBAABCgAdFiEEreZoqmdXGLWf4p/qJNaLcl1Uh9AFAmZgYHIACgkQJNaLcl1U
h9DZ/wf/ZIogM3NDLMaCTxNsRikMzWiooLVUWAOHEoDUbhu91kG6fWBYVHUwDuHX
v2ZWGDKptRlwPrxx7ixSn4UgZlqHOcnqbTuVi/JzX+VtB1aYX/KWKKlkVfptZ6yl
mohaQOBVS5VoXAUVEexOgIJ5lNCPgRMFNvXfzbBQTaAfeHGp+sPgzUzivAaFuvSy
oVG/CI8bptsyhD7/0ZgEhizhOe329ITuVZ4i9/JD+d346w9IisFSzyMa+f5qPYYg
2WcwhRNIB1OaaMcIgXekGPiJzi5SCL6TRwWpGhVOwKFJ5e3cR7jgvzuwR2kEQyx6
1w5ao6U4U7topnm7IzHzvpp/AagL9Q==
=LbHy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--dPsNrGbRL7TTHtEY--