Hi Catalin > -----Original Message----- > From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@xxxxxxx> > Sent: 2019年9月25日 22:38 > To: Justin He (Arm Technology China) <Justin.He@xxxxxxx> > Cc: Will Deacon <will@xxxxxxxxxx>; Mark Rutland > <Mark.Rutland@xxxxxxx>; James Morse <James.Morse@xxxxxxx>; Marc > Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx>; Matthew Wilcox <willy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Kirill A. > Shutemov <kirill.shutemov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; linux-arm- > kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux- > mm@xxxxxxxxx; Suzuki Poulose <Suzuki.Poulose@xxxxxxx>; Punit > Agrawal <punitagrawal@xxxxxxxxx>; Anshuman Khandual > <Anshuman.Khandual@xxxxxxx>; Alex Van Brunt > <avanbrunt@xxxxxxxxxx>; Robin Murphy <Robin.Murphy@xxxxxxx>; > Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Andrew Morton <akpm@linux- > foundation.org>; Jérôme Glisse <jglisse@xxxxxxxxxx>; Ralph Campbell > <rcampbell@xxxxxxxxxx>; hejianet@xxxxxxxxx; Kaly Xin (Arm Technology > China) <Kaly.Xin@xxxxxxx>; nd <nd@xxxxxxx> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 1/3] arm64: cpufeature: introduce helper > cpu_has_hw_af() > > On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 10:59:20AM +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.he@xxxxxxx> > > Suggested-by: Suzuki Poulose <Suzuki.Poulose@xxxxxxx> > > Reported-by: kbuild test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx> > > Which bug did the kbuild robot actually report? I'd drop this line. > This line is added due to [1]: "If you fix the issue, kindly add following tag Reported-by: kbuild test robot <lkp@xxxxxxxxx>" Yes, I know your concern, it is a little bit confusing. But I don't know how to distinguish the case btw a) original bug report b) bug report of my patch implementation? Thanks for any suggestion. [1] https://www.lkml.org/lkml/2019/9/18/940 -- Cheers, Justin (Jia He)
