On Thu, 7 Nov 2024 at 04:58, Sam Protsenko <semen.protse...@linaro.org> wrote:
>
> SCTLR_EL2 is a 64-bit register [1]. Return its value as long (64 bit)
> instead of int (32 bit) in get_sctlr() to make sure it's not trimmed.
>
> [1]
> https://developer.arm.com/documentation/ddi0595/2021-06/AArch64-Registers/SCTLR-EL2--System-Control-Register--EL2-?lang=en
>
> Fixes: 0ae7653128c8 ("arm64: core support")
> Suggested-by: Heinrich Schuchardt <xypron.g...@gmx.de>
> Signed-off-by: Sam Protsenko <semen.protse...@linaro.org>
> ---
> Changes in v2:
> - None (this patch was introduced in v2)
>
> arch/arm/cpu/armv8/cache_v8.c | 2 +-
> arch/arm/include/asm/system.h | 2 +-
> 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/cache_v8.c b/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/cache_v8.c
> index e6be6359c5d9..5d6953ffedd1 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/cache_v8.c
> +++ b/arch/arm/cpu/armv8/cache_v8.c
> @@ -825,7 +825,7 @@ void dcache_enable(void)
>
> void dcache_disable(void)
> {
> - uint32_t sctlr;
> + unsigned long sctlr;
Although that's correct since it's a 64bit platform, isn't it better
to define it as u64 to be sure we'll have at least 64 bits?
Thanks
/Ilias
>
> sctlr = get_sctlr();
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/system.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/system.h
> index 52f6c9b934d7..dbf9ab43e280 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/system.h
> +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/system.h
> @@ -171,7 +171,7 @@ static inline unsigned int current_el(void)
> return 3 & (el >> 2);
> }
>
> -static inline unsigned int get_sctlr(void)
> +static inline unsigned long get_sctlr(void)
> {
> unsigned int el;
> unsigned long val;
> --
> 2.39.5
>
