Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-165689-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:40f1:3f00::1;
Date: Wed, 1 May 2024 11:37:35 -0700
From: Charlie Jenkins <charlie@rivosinc.com>
To: Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org>
Cc: Evan Green <evan@rivosinc.com>, Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
	Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
	Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
	Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
	Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>, Guo Ren <guoren@kernel.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor+dt@kernel.org>, Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org>,
	Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@gmail.com>,
	Samuel Holland <samuel@sholland.org>,
	Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>,
	=?iso-8859-1?Q?Cl=E9ment_L=E9ger?= <cleger@rivosinc.com>,
	Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>, Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
	linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@rivosinc.com>,
	linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-sunxi@lists.linux.dev,
	linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 05/16] riscv: Extend cpufeature.c to detect vendor
 extensions
Message-ID: <ZjKL7x+s5AYzdCGE@ghost>
References: <20240426-dev-charlie-support_thead_vector_6_9-v4-0-b692f3c516ec@rivosinc.com>
 <20240426-dev-charlie-support_thead_vector_6_9-v4-5-b692f3c516ec@rivosinc.com>
 <CALs-HstM64Hy_=XVz=0sWQt=8j1u+bq6RhthUuD3P0E4=HyvcA@mail.gmail.com>
 <ZjKBKg5zzikR5ngl@ghost>
 <20240501-banner-sniff-4c5958eb15ef@spud>
 <20240501-moneyless-shifter-a54bbaecc4e7@spud>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <20240501-moneyless-shifter-a54bbaecc4e7@spud>

On Wed, May 01, 2024 at 07:09:28PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Wed, May 01, 2024 at 07:03:46PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > On Wed, May 01, 2024 at 10:51:38AM -0700, Charlie Jenkins wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 01, 2024 at 09:44:15AM -0700, Evan Green wrote:
> > > > On Fri, Apr 26, 2024 at 2:29 PM Charlie Jenkins <charlie@rivosinc.com> wrote:
> > > > > +       for (int i = 0; i < riscv_isa_vendor_ext_list_size; i++) {
> > > > > +               const struct riscv_isa_vendor_ext_data_list *ext_list = riscv_isa_vendor_ext_list[i];
> > > > > +
> > > > > +               if (bitmap_empty(ext_list->vendor_bitmap, ext_list->bitmap_size))
> > > > > +                       bitmap_copy(ext_list->vendor_bitmap,
> > > > > +                                   ext_list->per_hart_vendor_bitmap[cpu].isa,
> > > > > +                                   ext_list->bitmap_size);
> > > > 
> > > > Could you get into trouble here if the set of vendor extensions
> > > > reduces to zero, and then becomes non-zero? To illustrate, consider
> > > > these masks:
> > > > cpu 0: 0x0000C000
> > > > cpu 1: 0x00000003 <<< vendor_bitmap ANDs out to 0
> > > > cpu 2: 0x00000010 <<< oops, we end up copying this into vendor_bitmap
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Huh that's a good point. The standard extensions have that same bug too?
> > > 
> > > 	if (bitmap_empty(riscv_isa, RISCV_ISA_EXT_MAX))
> > > 		bitmap_copy(riscv_isa, isainfo->isa, RISCV_ISA_EXT_MAX);
> > > 	else
> > > 		bitmap_and(riscv_isa, riscv_isa, isainfo->isa, RISCV_ISA_EXT_MAX);
> > 
> > I suppose it could in theory, but the boot hart needs ima to even get
> > this far. I think you'd only end up with this happening if there were
> > enabled harts that supported rvXXe, but I don't think we even add those
> > to the possible set of CPUs. I'll have to check.
> 
> Ye, you don't get marked possible if you don't have ima, so I don't
> think this is possible to have happen. Maybe a comment here is
> sufficient, explaining why this cannot reduce to zeros?

Okay cool. A comment is sufficient then.

- Charlie

> 
>