[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <tencent_01F8E0050FB4B11CC170C3639E43F41A1709@qq.com>
Date: Fri, 24 May 2024 11:35:59 +0800
From: Yangyu Chen <cyy@...self.name>
To: linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org
Cc: Elliott Hughes <enh@...gle.com>,
Charlie Jenkins <charlie@...osinc.com>,
Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Evan Green <evan@...osinc.com>,
Clément Léger <cleger@...osinc.com>,
Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>,
Andrew Jones <ajones@...tanamicro.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org,
Yangyu Chen <cyy@...self.name>
Subject: [PATCH v2 3/3] RISC-V: hwprobe: not treat KEY_CPUPERF_0 as bitmask
Since the value in KEY_CPUPERF_0 is not bitmask, remove the wrong code
in hwprobe.h.
Signed-off-by: Yangyu Chen <cyy@...self.name>
---
arch/riscv/include/asm/hwprobe.h | 1 -
1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/hwprobe.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/hwprobe.h
index 630507dff5ea..f24cad22bbe1 100644
--- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/hwprobe.h
+++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/hwprobe.h
@@ -20,7 +20,6 @@ static inline bool hwprobe_key_is_bitmask(__s64 key)
switch (key) {
case RISCV_HWPROBE_KEY_BASE_BEHAVIOR:
case RISCV_HWPROBE_KEY_IMA_EXT_0:
- case RISCV_HWPROBE_KEY_CPUPERF_0:
return true;
}
--
2.45.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists