Hey all, Just circling back to this one, since the reply from Palmer was to another thread with a much smaller CC list. On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 08:27:23PM +0530, Anup Patel wrote: > On Wed, Feb 8, 2023 at 6:27 PM Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Wed, Feb 08, 2023 at 09:24:28AM +0530, Anup Patel wrote: > > > The presence of S*aia in ISA string only implies that AIA extended > > > local interrupt CSRs are implemented by the underlying RISC-V > > > implementation. > > > > Would you mind linking to where this is documented & explaining in your > > commit message why it is okay operate on the basis of s*aia in the ISA > > string only mandates the presence of the CSRs and nothing more. > > > > I think when I was reading it last night, I saw some commentary in this > > vein in Section 1.6 of the rc2 spec. Although IIRC it noted changes in > > interrupt behaviour there too, so I'm not sure if that section is what you > > are referring to here. > > > > Perhaps this is all just a good argument for providing more information > > in commit messages ;) > > Sure, I am anyway going to send v3 after rebase so I will cite the > Section 1.6 of AIA spec in the commit description. We had a nice conversation about this on during the weekly patchwork sync call :) The end result of that one was "inconclusive" and the outcome appears to be that we will wait until the entire spec is frozen before doing anything here. Palmer left a comment in response to another thread to that effect: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/mhng-474f7ecd-65b8-4cfa-8b75-e51b896cc58e@palmer-ri-x1c9/ Cheers, Conor.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
