Hi Catalin > -----Original Message----- > From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.mari...@arm.com> > Sent: 2019年9月25日 22:38 > To: Justin He (Arm Technology China) <justin...@arm.com> > Cc: Will Deacon <w...@kernel.org>; Mark Rutland > <mark.rutl...@arm.com>; James Morse <james.mo...@arm.com>; Marc > Zyngier <m...@kernel.org>; Matthew Wilcox <wi...@infradead.org>; Kirill A. > Shutemov <kirill.shute...@linux.intel.com>; linux-arm- > ker...@lists.infradead.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; linux- > m...@kvack.org; Suzuki Poulose <suzuki.poul...@arm.com>; Punit > Agrawal <punitagra...@gmail.com>; Anshuman Khandual > <anshuman.khand...@arm.com>; Alex Van Brunt > <avanbr...@nvidia.com>; Robin Murphy <robin.mur...@arm.com>; > Thomas Gleixner <t...@linutronix.de>; Andrew Morton <akpm@linux- > foundation.org>; Jérôme Glisse <jgli...@redhat.com>; Ralph Campbell > <rcampb...@nvidia.com>; hejia...@gmail.com; Kaly Xin (Arm Technology > China) <kaly....@arm.com>; nd <n...@arm.com> > 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...@arm.com> > > Suggested-by: Suzuki Poulose <suzuki.poul...@arm.com> > > Reported-by: kbuild test robot <l...@intel.com> > > 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 <l...@intel.com>"
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)
