Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Fri, 20 Jan 2023 14:16:48 +0000
From:   Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
To:     Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com>
CC:     <linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org>,
        Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>, <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
        <conor@kernel.org>, <corbet@lwn.net>, <guoren@kernel.org>,
        <heiko@sntech.de>, <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
        <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <linux-doc@vger.kernel.org>,
        Heiko Stuebner <heiko.stuebner@vrull.eu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] RISC-V: resort all extensions in consistent orders
Message-ID: <Y8qiUCH6ERYmAdgg@wendy>
References: <20221205144525.2148448-1-conor.dooley@microchip.com>
 <20221205144525.2148448-3-conor.dooley@microchip.com>
 <20230120135632.vb7ncvoapnaixluu@orel>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256;
        protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="8B9vR+0VfvRQQXio"
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20230120135632.vb7ncvoapnaixluu@orel>
Precedence: bulk

--8B9vR+0VfvRQQXio
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Jan 20, 2023 at 02:56:32PM +0100, Andrew Jones wrote:
> Hi Conor,
>=20
> I'm digging this back up because I'm basing Zicboz on it.
>=20
> If we take "riscv: improve boot time isa extensions handling", then this
> becomes a bunch of manually enumerated defines
>=20
>  #define RISCV_ISA_EXT_SSCOFPMF         26
>  #define RISCV_ISA_EXT_SVPBMT           27
>  #define RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICBOM           28
>  #define RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZIHINTPAUSE      29
>  #define RISCV_ISA_EXT_SSTC             30
>  #define RISCV_ISA_EXT_SVINVAL          31
>=20
> Keeping those in alphabetical order would either require manually
> reenumerating them or to allow the numbers to be out of order as
> we add more extensions. I think I'd prefer we just add new
> extensions at the bottom and keep the numbers in order.

Yes. I mentioned that on one of the earlier versions of Jisheng's
patchset - initially I blindly said "alphabetical please".
I quickly realised that that was a really stupid idea as it is would
just be an _invitiation_ for bugs if we did, since names are far more
easily searchable than figuring out the max in the manual enumeration.

Since Jisheng's patchset just deleted what I had resorted, I left this
change as-was. Just need to make sure any comment about ordering also
gets removed when the enum goes away.
I'll keep an eye on for-next to make sure that it does.

TL;DR I agree!

Thanks,
Conor.


--8B9vR+0VfvRQQXio
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----

iHUEABYIAB0WIQRh246EGq/8RLhDjO14tDGHoIJi0gUCY8qiUAAKCRB4tDGHoIJi
0oSKAP9zqiy1G7Sw0cg7bsoy8fmPLJPzS1bNJZ4BX4E8lRk5wAD9Enm99HDzo50d
wtYphmEGxPoxpyWwxNwDASSWnlStzQk=
=C1Iw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--8B9vR+0VfvRQQXio--