On Mon, Jun 18, 2018 at 01:02:53PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> Currently we assert that the SCTLR_EL{1,2}_{SET,CLEAR} bits are
> self-consistent with an assertion in config_sctlr_el1(). This is a bit
> unusual, since config_sctlr_el1() doesn't make use of these definitions,
> and is far away from the definitions themselves.
>
> We can use the CPP #error directive to have equivalent assertions in
> <asm/sysreg.h>, next to the definitions of the set/clear bits, which is
> a bit clearer and simpler.
>
> At the same time, lets fill in the upper 32 bits for both registers in
> their repsective RES0 definitions. This could be a little nicer with
> GENMASK_ULL(63, 32), but this currently lives in <linux/bitops.h>, which
> cannot safely be included from assembly, as <asm/sysreg.h> can.
>
> Note the when the preprocessor evaluates an expression for an #if
> directive, all signed or unsigned values are treated as intmax_t or
> uintmax_t respectively. To avoid ambiguity, we define explicitly define
> the mask of all 64 bits.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@xxxxxxx>
> Cc: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx>
> Cc: Dave Martin <dave.martin@xxxxxxx>
> Cc: James Morse <james.morse@xxxxxxx>
> Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@xxxxxxx>
Acked-by: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx>
