On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 13:54:47 +0100 Will Deacon <w...@kernel.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 09:57:38AM +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(). > > > > Signed-off-by: Jia He <justin...@arm.com> > > Suggested-by: Suzuki Poulose <suzuki.poul...@arm.com> > > Reviewed-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.mari...@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 9cde5d2e768f..949bc7c85030 100644 > > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h > > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/cpufeature.h > > @@ -659,6 +659,16 @@ static inline u32 > > id_aa64mmfr0_parange_to_phys_shift(int parange) > > default: return CONFIG_ARM64_PA_BITS; > > } > > } > > + > > +/* 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; > > 0xf? I think we should have a mask in sysreg.h for this constant. We don't have the mask, but we certainly have the shift. GENMASK(ID_AA64MMFR1_HADBS_SHIFT + 3, ID_AA64MMFR1_HADBS_SHIFT) is a bit of a mouthful though. Ideally, we'd have a helper for that. M. -- Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.