Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 408BAC636D4 for ; Tue, 7 Feb 2023 18:05:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232282AbjBGSFZ (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Feb 2023 13:05:25 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:33822 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231947AbjBGSFU (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Feb 2023 13:05:20 -0500 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org (dfw.source.kernel.org [139.178.84.217]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 193323A86F; Tue, 7 Feb 2023 10:05:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A637660F71; Tue, 7 Feb 2023 18:05:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D97FFC4339B; Tue, 7 Feb 2023 18:05:13 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1675793116; bh=H2ys2pYdG89Ku64gAFGM6WT2YOc0n7GzZTdp0ffbLLg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=RxM/tp4CkjXmsq8wO/dTfmLWZ32PQ7NFatNaGZNu+evrSclfmPGJ5PI7W/dcyUa9C 8jSqCk1MMOIYzYdL5iGWfpbE2MC6yFctuUL2gzhgssB1hmz5zUW846bjz3498ooOO3 i8FEft99VTDkMSvLOX7Lyl8W0KRuVY+Eqq3ci/hfiYhIxSiArKxODBgdiR0Y7pVAV1 CgX9rGLWPUjfARygXTMkr6cu+7mg1vQ5kq7sKahG1xyHR7w8Xh3+yCWlHoW/AaEDiA 19kw6Ggrc7uw+CiLSjdGJG8YBN/vveiV2qcDENgDdwpzKZosANA5FWc0GsMVkwXg1N kClw+abn+EUqQ== Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2023 18:05:11 +0000 From: Conor Dooley To: Anup Patel Cc: Palmer Dabbelt , pbonzini@redhat.com, atishp@atishpatra.org, Paul Walmsley , ajones@ventanamicro.com, anup@brainfault.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/7] RISC-V: Detect AIA CSRs from ISA string Message-ID: References: <20230128072737.2995881-3-apatel@ventanamicro.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="m0n7JpZfETbh6abr" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org --m0n7JpZfETbh6abr Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hey Anup, Palmer, On Fri, Feb 03, 2023 at 05:31:01PM +0530, Anup Patel wrote: > On Fri, Feb 3, 2023 at 5:54 AM Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > > > > On Fri, 27 Jan 2023 23:27:32 PST (-0800), apatel@ventanamicro.com wrote: > > > We have two extension names for AIA ISA support: Smaia (M-mode AIA CS= Rs) > > > and Ssaia (S-mode AIA CSRs). > > > > This has pretty much the same problem that we had with the other > > AIA-related ISA string patches, where there's that ambiguity with the > > non-ratified chapters. IIRC when this came up in GCC the rough idea was > > to try and document that we're going to interpret the standard ISA > > strings that way, but now that we're doing custom ISA extensions it > > seems saner to just define on here that removes the ambiguity. > > > > I just sent > > > > which documents that. >=20 > I am not sure why you say that these are custom extensions. >=20 > Multiple folks have clarified that both Smaia and Ssaia are frozen > ISA extensions as-per RVI process. The individual chapters which > are in the draft state have nothing to do with Smaia and Ssaia CSRs. >=20 > Please refer: > https://github.com/riscv/riscv-aia/pull/36 > https://lists.riscv.org/g/tech-aia/message/336 > https://lists.riscv.org/g/tech-aia/message/337 All of these links seem to discuss the draft chapters somehow being incompatible with the non-draft ones. I would very expect that that, as pointed out in several places there, that the draft chapters finalisation would not lead to meaningful (and incompatible!) changes being made to the non-draft chapters. Maybe yourself and Palmer are looking at this from different perspectives? Looking at his patch from Friday: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/20230203001201.14770-1-palmer@rivosinc.= com/ He specifically mentioned this aspect, as opposed to the aspect that your links refer to. Surely a duo-plic, if that ever comes to be, could be detected from compatible strings in DT or w/e - but how do you intend differentiating between an implementation of S*aia that contains the IOMMU support in Chapter 9 in a finalised form, versus an implementation that may make "different decisions" when it comes to that chapter of the spec? I thought that would be handled by extension versions, but I am told that those are not a thing any more. If that's not true, and there'll be a version number that we can pull in =66rom a DT and parse which will distinguish between the two, then please correct my misunderstanding here! Thanks, Conor. > > > We extend the ISA string parsing to detect Smaia and Ssaia extensions. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Anup Patel > > > Reviewed-by: Andrew Jones > > > --- > > > arch/riscv/include/asm/hwcap.h | 2 ++ > > > arch/riscv/kernel/cpu.c | 2 ++ > > > arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c | 2 ++ > > > 3 files changed, 6 insertions(+) > > > > > > diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/hwcap.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/= hwcap.h > > > index 86328e3acb02..341ef30a3718 100644 > > > --- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/hwcap.h > > > +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/hwcap.h > > > @@ -59,6 +59,8 @@ enum riscv_isa_ext_id { > > > RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZIHINTPAUSE, > > > RISCV_ISA_EXT_SSTC, > > > RISCV_ISA_EXT_SVINVAL, > > > + RISCV_ISA_EXT_SMAIA, > > > + RISCV_ISA_EXT_SSAIA, > > > RISCV_ISA_EXT_ID_MAX > > > }; > > > static_assert(RISCV_ISA_EXT_ID_MAX <=3D RISCV_ISA_EXT_MAX); > > > diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpu.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpu.c > > > index 1b9a5a66e55a..a215ec929160 100644 > > > --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpu.c > > > +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpu.c > > > @@ -162,6 +162,8 @@ arch_initcall(riscv_cpuinfo_init); > > > * extensions by an underscore. > > > */ > > > static struct riscv_isa_ext_data isa_ext_arr[] =3D { > > > + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(smaia, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SMAIA), > > > + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(ssaia, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SSAIA), > > > > This will conflict with that ISA string refactoring I just merged. It > > should be a pretty mechanical merge conflict, but if you want we can do > > a shared tag with the first few patches and I can handle the merge > > conflict locally. >=20 > I am planning to send this series as a second PR for Linux-6.3 after your > PR (which includes ISA string refactoring) is merged. Is that okay with y= ou? >=20 > With that said, it would request you to ACK this patch as well. >=20 > > > > > __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(sscofpmf, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SSCOFPMF), > > > __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(sstc, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SSTC), > > > __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(svinval, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SVINVAL), > > > diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufe= ature.c > > > index 93e45560af30..3c5b51f519d5 100644 > > > --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c > > > +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c > > > @@ -228,6 +228,8 @@ void __init riscv_fill_hwcap(void) > > > SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("zihintpause", RISCV_IS= A_EXT_ZIHINTPAUSE); > > > SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("sstc", RISCV_ISA_EXT_S= STC); > > > SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("svinval", RISCV_ISA_EX= T_SVINVAL); > > > + SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("smaia", RISCV_ISA_EXT_= SMAIA); > > > + SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("ssaia", RISCV_ISA_EXT_= SSAIA); > > > } > > > #undef SET_ISA_EXT_MAP > > > } >=20 > Thanks, > Anup --m0n7JpZfETbh6abr Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iHUEABYIAB0WIQRh246EGq/8RLhDjO14tDGHoIJi0gUCY+KS0wAKCRB4tDGHoIJi 0vYeAQDID5gy1NNsVol0uOM4K67baVkasU31cYZaNQ0VNxM0gQD+OzIE9sYy8CY/ keBJVPVev2OwtuUzoEEyRZuB12t4fw0= =V2HQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --m0n7JpZfETbh6abr--