# Re: \[PATCH v2 2/2\] arm64: insn: drop NOP from steppable hint list

- From: Masami Hiramatsu (Google) \<mhiramat@kernel.org\>
- Date: 2026-02-24 08:23:49 
- List: linux-arm-kernel
- Page: https://ratatoskr.run/linux-arm-kernel/2026/02/3424258
- Thread: https://ratatoskr.run/linux-arm-kernel/2025/11/3284286/t.md

```text
On Tue, 17 Feb 2026 16:57:08 +0000
Mark Rutland [ref] wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 17, 2026 at 07:08:55PM +0530, Khaja Hussain Shaik Khaji wrote:
> > NOP is already handled via instruction emulation and does not require
> > single-stepping. Drop it from aarch64_insn_is_steppable_hint().
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Khaja Hussain Shaik Khaji <redacted>
> > ---
> >  arch/arm64/include/asm/insn.h | 1 -
> >  1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/insn.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/insn.h
> > index e1d30ba99d01..9429f76906e0 100644
> > --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/insn.h
> > +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/insn.h
> > @@ -456,7 +456,6 @@ static __always_inline bool aarch64_insn_is_steppable_hint(u32 insn)
> >  	case AARCH64_INSN_HINT_BTIC:
> >  	case AARCH64_INSN_HINT_BTIJ:
> >  	case AARCH64_INSN_HINT_BTIJC:
> > -	case AARCH64_INSN_HINT_NOP:
> >  		return true;
> >  	default:
> >  		return false;
> 
> The intent is that aarch64_insn_is_steppable_hint() says whether an
> instruction is safe to step, not whether it *must* be stepped. I think
> we can leave NOP here unless this is causing some functional problem?

Agreed. I think we should keep this as it is.

Thank you,

> 
> Mark.
> 


-- 
Masami Hiramatsu (Google) [ref]

```