[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Ya44+GAmeGBFVAad@arm.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2021 16:23:20 +0000
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
To: Yunfeng Ye <yeyunfeng@...wei.com>
Cc: will@...nel.org, wangkefeng.wang@...wei.com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
wuxu.wu@...wei.com, Hewenliang <hewenliang4@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: mm: Use asid2idx() and asid feature macro for
cleanup
On Thu, Oct 28, 2021 at 08:27:23PM +0800, Yunfeng Ye wrote:
> Use asid2idx() and asid feature macro for cleanup.
>
> No functional change.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yunfeng Ye <yeyunfeng@...wei.com>
> ---
> arch/arm64/mm/context.c | 8 ++++----
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/mm/context.c b/arch/arm64/mm/context.c
> index cd72576ae2b7..076f14a75bd5 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/mm/context.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/mm/context.c
> @@ -50,10 +50,10 @@ static u32 get_cpu_asid_bits(void)
> pr_warn("CPU%d: Unknown ASID size (%d); assuming 8-bit\n",
> smp_processor_id(), fld);
> fallthrough;
> - case 0:
> + case ID_AA64MMFR0_ASID_8:
> asid = 8;
> break;
> - case 2:
> + case ID_AA64MMFR0_ASID_16:
> asid = 16;
> }
I think this change is fine.
> @@ -162,7 +162,7 @@ static u64 new_context(struct mm_struct *mm)
> u64 generation = atomic64_read(&asid_generation);
>
> if (asid != 0) {
> - u64 newasid = generation | (asid & ~ASID_MASK);
> + u64 newasid = generation | asid2idx(asid);
>
> /*
> * If our current ASID was active during a rollover, we
> @@ -306,7 +306,7 @@ unsigned long arm64_mm_context_get(struct mm_struct *mm)
> out_unlock:
> raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&cpu_asid_lock, flags);
>
> - asid &= ~ASID_MASK;
> + asid = asid2idx(asid);
While functionally the code is the same, I don't think this was the
intention of asid2idx(). It's meant to provide an index into asid_map,
while the ASID_MASK lines isolate the asid number and add a new
generation to it.
--
Catalin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists