[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aFrTcGt-g5sc-uv0@arm.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2025 17:33:52 +0100
From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@....com>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
Cc: Yeoreum Yun <yeoreum.yun@....com>, pcc@...gle.com, will@...nel.org,
broonie@...nel.org, anshuman.khandual@....com, joey.gouly@....com,
yury.khrustalev@....com, oliver.upton@...ux.dev,
frederic@...nel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, surenb@...gle.com,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 03/10] arm64/kvm: expose FEAT_MTE_TAGGED_FAR feature
to guest
Hi Marc,
On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 05:43:07PM +0100, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> In general, please use a patch title format that matches the one used
> for the subsystem. For KVM, that'd be "KVM: arm64: Expose ..."/
[...]
> > case SYS_ID_AA64PFR2_EL1:
> > - /* We only expose FPMR */
> > - val &= ID_AA64PFR2_EL1_FPMR;
> > + mask = ID_AA64PFR2_EL1_FPMR;
> > +
> > + if (kvm_has_mte(vcpu->kvm))
> > + mask |= ID_AA64PFR2_EL1_MTEFAR;
> > +
> > + val &= mask;
>
> I don't think there is a need for an extra variable, and you could
> follow the pattern established in this file by writing this as:
>
> val &= (ID_AA64PFR2_EL1_FPMR |
> (kvm_has_mte(vcpu->kvm) ? ID_AA64PFR2_EL1_MTEFAR : 0));
>
> Not a big deal though.
I can make the changes locally. Are you ok with the patch otherwise?
--
Catalin
Powered by blists - more mailing lists