[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <55CA16CA.8060609@arm.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2015 16:37:46 +0100
From: "Suzuki K. Poulose" <Suzuki.Poulose@....com>
To: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ard.biesheuvel@...aro.org>
CC: Mark Rutland <Mark.Rutland@....com>,
"aph@...hat.com" <aph@...hat.com>,
Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@....com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"edward.nevill@...aro.org" <edward.nevill@...aro.org>,
"linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 01/10] arm64: feature registers: Documentation
On 11/08/15 15:23, Catalin Marinas wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 07:48:48PM +0200, Ard Biesheuvel wrote:
>>> On 10/08/15 17:06, Catalin Marinas wrote:
>>>> And to debunk some of the counter arguments:
>>>>
>>>> a) Running out of HWCAP bits - I really doubt this, we can always
>>>> introduce 64 more via a new elf_hwcapX
>>
>> Note that ELF_HWCAP is also wired into ifunc resolution of GNU
>> indirect functions, which looks like a useful feature although it
>> isn't used that widely yet.
>
> I forgot to mention, we also need an HWCAP_CPUID with these patches when
> we expose the MRS interface. The ifunc resolver could use MRS when
> available. But I would still keep adding HWCAP bits for new features,
> even if we risk running out of the 64-bit we have now.
>
Sure, I will add the HWCAP_CPUID in the next version of the series.
Thanks
Suzuki
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists