[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240306-tactless-decathlon-b0df16517b1b@wendy>
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2024 13:19:37 +0000
From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>
To: Charlie Jenkins <charlie@...osinc.com>
CC: Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>, Palmer Dabbelt
<palmer@...belt.com>, Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>, Jisheng Zhang
<jszhang@...nel.org>, Evan Green <evan@...osinc.com>,
Clément Léger <cleger@...osinc.com>, Eric Biggers
<ebiggers@...nel.org>, Elliot Berman <quic_eberman@...cinc.com>, Charles Lohr
<lohr85@...il.com>, <linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 3/4] riscv: Decouple emulated unaligned accesses from
access speed
On Fri, Mar 01, 2024 at 05:45:34PM -0800, Charlie Jenkins wrote:
> -void unaligned_emulation_finish(void)
> +bool check_unaligned_access_emulated_all_cpus(void)
> {
> int cpu;
>
> - /*
> - * We can only support PR_UNALIGN controls if all CPUs have misaligned
> - * accesses emulated since tasks requesting such control can run on any
> - * CPU.
> - */
Why was this comment removed? This patch doesn't change the situations
in which PR_UNALIGN is allowed, right?
> - for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
> - if (per_cpu(misaligned_access_speed, cpu) !=
> - RISCV_HWPROBE_MISALIGNED_EMULATED) {
> - return;
> - }
> - }
> + for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
> + if (check_unaligned_access_emulated(cpu))
> + return false;
> +
> unaligned_ctl = true;
> + return true;
> }
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (229 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists