On Fri, Feb 3, 2023 at 5:54 AM Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Fri, 27 Jan 2023 23:27:32 PST (-0800), apatel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > We have two extension names for AIA ISA support: Smaia (M-mode AIA CSRs) > > 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 > <https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230203001201.14770-1-palmer@xxxxxxxxxxxx/> > which documents that. I am not sure why you say that these are custom extensions. 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. 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 > > > We extend the ISA string parsing to detect Smaia and Ssaia extensions. > > > > Signed-off-by: Anup Patel <apatel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > Reviewed-by: Andrew Jones <ajones@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > 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 <= 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[] = { > > + __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. 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 you? With that said, it would request you to ACK this patch as well. > > > __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/cpufeature.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_ISA_EXT_ZIHINTPAUSE); > > SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("sstc", RISCV_ISA_EXT_SSTC); > > SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("svinval", RISCV_ISA_EXT_SVINVAL); > > + SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("smaia", RISCV_ISA_EXT_SMAIA); > > + SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("ssaia", RISCV_ISA_EXT_SSAIA); > > } > > #undef SET_ISA_EXT_MAP > > } Thanks, Anup
