On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 11:08:21AM +0200, Clément Léger wrote: > >> If we consider to have potentially broken isa string (ie extensions > >> dependencies not correctly handled), then we'll need some way to > >> validate this within the kernel. > > > > No, the DT passed to the kernel should be correct and we by and large we > > should not have to do validation of it. What I meant above was writing > > the binding so that something invalid will not pass dtbs_check. > > Acked, I was mainly answering Deepak question about dependencies wrt to > using __RISCV_ISA_EXT_SUPERSET() which does not seems to be relevant > since we expect a correct isa string to be passed. Ahh, okay. > But as you stated, DT > validation clearly make sense. I think a lot of extensions strings would > benefit such support (All the Zv* depends on V, etc). I think it is actually as simple something like this, which makes it invalid to have "d" without "f": | diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/extensions.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/extensions.yaml | index 468c646247aa..594828700cbe 100644 | --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/extensions.yaml | +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/extensions.yaml | @@ -484,5 +484,20 @@ properties: | Registers in the AX45MP datasheet. | https://www.andestech.com/wp-content/uploads/AX45MP-1C-Rev.-5.0.0-Datasheet.pdf | | +allOf: | + - if: | + properties: | + riscv,isa-extensions: | + contains: | + const: "d" | + not: | + contains: | + const: "f" | + then: | + properties: | + riscv,isa-extensions: | + false | + | + | additionalProperties: true | ... If you do have d without f, the checker will say: cpu@2: riscv,isa-extensions: False schema does not allow ['i', 'm', 'a', 'd', 'c'] At least that's readable, even though not clear about what to do. I wish the former could be said about the wall of text you get for /each/ undocumented entry in the string.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
