[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160329082911.GG20211@studium.uni-erlangen.de>
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2016 10:29:11 +0200
From: Jonas Rabenstein <jonas.rabenstein@...dium.uni-erlangen.de>
To: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux@....linux.org.uk, arnd@...db.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm: remove tautologic #ifdefs in proc-v7-3level.S
On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 10:05:58AM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Tuesday 29 March 2016 09:37:51 Jonas Rabenstein wrote:
> > The file arch/arm/mm/proc-v7-3level.S is only used by the #include
> > directive in arch/arm/mm/proc-v7.S:23. This #include is conditional and
> > depends on CONFIG_ARM_LPAE (otherwise proc-v7-2level.S is used).
> > CONFIG_ARM_LPAE has a dependency on CONFIG_MMU defined in Kconfig.
> > Consequently, checks for CONFIG_MMU in proc-v7-3level.S are superfluous.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jonas Rabenstein <jonas.rabenstein@...dium.uni-erlangen.de>
> > ---
> > I detected the issue with chimaera, a tool I currently develop for my bachelor
> > thesis extending the undertaker tool suite (https://undertaker.cs.fau.de).
>
> Nice catch!
>
> Reviewed-by: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
>
> I guess you should submit the same thing for the other file as well,
> either in the same patch or as a series.
I do not get, what you mean with 'the other file'? For the
proc-v7-2level.S this precondition does not hold, as proc-v7-2level.S is
included if !CONFIG_ARM_LPAE. Consequently, no evidence about the MMU
state is available in their.
> You can also add
>
> Fixes: 8d2cd3a38fd6 ("ARM: LPAE: Factor out classic-MMU specific code into proc-v7-2level.S")
Shouldn't it be:
Fixes: 1b6ba46b7efa ("ARM: LPAE: MMU setup for the 3-level page table
format")?
Thanks for your help and advice,
Jonas
Powered by blists - more mailing lists