On Sat, Sep 21, 2019 at 09:50:52PM +0800, Jia He wrote:
> We unconditionally set the HW_AFDBM capability and only enable it on
> CPUs which really have the feature. But sometimes we need to know
> whether this cpu has the capability of HW AF. So decouple AF from
> DBM by new helper cpu_has_hw_af().
>
> Reported-by: kbuild test robot <l...@intel.com>
> Suggested-by: Suzuki Poulose <suzuki.poul...@arm.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jia He <justin...@arm.com>
> ---
> arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h | 10 ++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h
> b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h
> index c96ffa4722d3..46caf934ba4e 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h
> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h
> @@ -667,6 +667,16 @@ static inline u32 id_aa64mmfr0_parange_to_phys_shift(int
> parange)
> default: return CONFIG_ARM64_PA_BITS;
> }
> }
> +
> +/* Decouple AF from AFDBM. */
We could do with a better comment here or just remove it altogether. The
aim of the patch was to decouple AF check from the AF+DBM but the
comment here should describe what the function does. Maybe something
like: "Check whether hardware update of the Access flag is supported".
> +static inline bool cpu_has_hw_af(void)
> +{
> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_ARM64_HW_AFDBM))
> + return read_cpuid(ID_AA64MMFR1_EL1) & 0xf;
> +
> + return false;
> +}
Other than the comment above,
Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.mari...@arm.com>
