Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Mon, 7 Oct 2019 09:58:23 -0700
From:   "hch@infradead.org" <hch@infradead.org>
To:     Atish Patra <Atish.Patra@wdc.com>
Cc:     "hch@infradead.org" <hch@infradead.org>,
        "alankao@andestech.com" <alankao@andestech.com>,
        "anup@brainfault.org" <anup@brainfault.org>,
        "paul.walmsley@sifive.com" <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
        "linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org" <linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>,
        "palmer@sifive.com" <palmer@sifive.com>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "aou@eecs.berkeley.edu" <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
        "johan@kernel.org" <johan@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [v6 PATCH] RISC-V: Remove unsupported isa string info print
Message-ID: <20191007165823.GA5116@infradead.org>
References: <20191001002318.7515-1-atish.patra@wdc.com>
 <20191001070236.GA7622@infradead.org>
 <b0c39a9895698d74e2f44eb1f2faed46eee54bc3.camel@wdc.com>
 <20191001101016.GB23507@infradead.org>
 <20191002015338.GA28086@andestech.com>
 <bc0d2f2803950ebb38fd487fddb0fcf8a370512e.camel@wdc.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <bc0d2f2803950ebb38fd487fddb0fcf8a370512e.camel@wdc.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.1 (2019-06-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Oct 02, 2019 at 06:28:59AM +0000, Atish Patra wrote:
> On Wed, 2019-10-02 at 09:53 +0800, Alan Kao wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 01, 2019 at 03:10:16AM -0700, hch@infradead.org wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 01, 2019 at 08:22:37AM +0000, Atish Patra wrote:
> > > > riscv_of_processor_hartid() or seems to be a better candidate. We
> > > > already check if "rv" is present in isa string or not. I will
> > > > extend
> > > > that to check for rv64i or rv32i. Is that okay ?
> > > 
> > > I'd rather lift the checks out of that into a function that is
> > > called
> > > exactly once per hart on boot (and future cpu hotplug).
> > 
> @Christoph
> Do you mean to lift the checks for "rv" as well from
> riscv_of_processor_hartid as well or leave that as it is? 

Sounds good to me (as a separate patch).  Again it makes much more
sense to validate this once early at boot time rather than a function
that can be called many tims during run time.