In general, please use a patch title format that matches the one used
for the subsystem. For KVM, that'd be "KVM: arm64: Expose ..."/
On Wed, 18 Jun 2025 09:45:06 +0100,
Yeoreum Yun <yeoreum.yun@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> expose FEAT_MTE_TAGGED_FAR feature to guest.
>
> Signed-off-by: Yeoreum Yun <yeoreum.yun@xxxxxxx>
> ---
> arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c | 14 ++++++++++----
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
> index 76c2f0da821f..c8c92cb9da01 100644
> --- a/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
> +++ b/arch/arm64/kvm/sys_regs.c
> @@ -1586,7 +1586,7 @@ static u64 __kvm_read_sanitised_id_reg(const struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> const struct sys_reg_desc *r)
> {
> u32 id = reg_to_encoding(r);
> - u64 val;
> + u64 val, mask;
>
> if (sysreg_visible_as_raz(vcpu, r))
> return 0;
> @@ -1617,8 +1617,12 @@ static u64 __kvm_read_sanitised_id_reg(const struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
> val &= ~ARM64_FEATURE_MASK(ID_AA64PFR1_EL1_MPAM_frac);
> break;
> case SYS_ID_AA64PFR2_EL1:
> - /* We only expose FPMR */
> - val &= ID_AA64PFR2_EL1_FPMR;
> + mask = ID_AA64PFR2_EL1_FPMR;
> +
> + if (kvm_has_mte(vcpu->kvm))
> + mask |= ID_AA64PFR2_EL1_MTEFAR;
> +
> + val &= mask;
I don't think there is a need for an extra variable, and you could
follow the pattern established in this file by writing this as:
val &= (ID_AA64PFR2_EL1_FPMR |
(kvm_has_mte(vcpu->kvm) ? ID_AA64PFR2_EL1_MTEFAR : 0));
Not a big deal though.
Thanks,
M.
--
Without deviation from the norm, progress is not possible.
