Hi Mark, > > > On Wed, Jun 11, 2025 at 02:58:11PM +0100, Yeoreum Yun wrote: > > > > > * The architecture specifies that bits 63:60 of FAR_EL1 are UNKNOWN > > > > * for tag check faults. Set them to corresponding bits in the untagged > > > > - * address. > > > > + * address if ARM64_MTE_FAR isn't supported. > > > > + * Otherwise, bits 63:60 of FAR_EL1 are KNOWN. > > > > Should that be "are UNKNOWN"? > > > Otherwise in here mentions the case when ARM64_MTE_FAR is supported, > > So the bits 63:60 of FAR_EL1 are "not UNKNOWN" but I write it with > > KNOWN. > > Ah, I see - KNOWN looks like one of the specially defined architectural > terms from the glossary of the ARM since it's all caps but KNOWN isn't > one of those words which was confusing me. > > > Do you want to change this to "not UNKNOWN"? > > or Am I missing something? > > DDI0487L.a D24.2.43 does use the term "not UNKNOWN" for that case so > that'd work like you suggest, or some other rewrite to use less formal > terms. Like I say it was specifically the use of caps. Sorry to make you confused. anyway I'll use the term with not UNKNOWN then. Thanks -- Sincerely, Yeoreum Yun
