On Nov 21, 2023, at 03:18, Eric Biggers <ebiggers@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > First, I can see your updated patchset at branch > "dev/jerrys/vector-crypto-upstream-v2" of https://github.com/JerryShih/linux, > but I haven't seen it on the mailing list yet. Are you planning to send it out? I will send it out soon. > Second, with your updated patchset, I'm not seeing any of the RISC-V optimized > algorithms be registered when I boot the kernel in QEMU. This is caused by the > new check 'riscv_isa_extension_available(NULL, ZICCLSM)' not passing. Is > checking for "Zicclsm" the correct way to determine whether unaligned memory > accesses are supported? > > I'm using 'qemu-system-riscv64 -cpu max -machine virt', with the very latest > QEMU commit (af9264da80073435), so it should have all the CPU features. > > - Eric Sorry, I just use my `internal` qemu with vector-crypto and rva22 patches. The public qemu haven't supported rva22 profiles. Here is the qemu patch[1] for that. But here is the discussion why the qemu doesn't export these `named extensions`(e.g. Zicclsm). I try to add Zicclsm in DT in the v2 patch set. Maybe we will have more discussion about the rva22 profiles in kernel DT. [1] LINK: https://lore.kernel.org/all/d1d6f2dc-55b2-4dce-a48a-4afbbf6df526@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/#t I don't know whether it's a good practice to check unaligned access using `Zicclsm`. Here is another related cpu feature for unaligned access: RISCV_HWPROBE_MISALIGNED_* But it looks like it always be initialized with `RISCV_HWPROBE_MISALIGNED_SLOW`[2]. It implies that linux kernel always supports unaligned access. But we have the actual HW which doesn't support unaligned access for vector unit. [2] LINK: https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/98b1cc82c4affc16f5598d4fa14b1858671b2263/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c#L575 I will still use `Zicclsm` checking in this stage for reviewing. And I will create qemu branch with Zicclsm enabled feature for testing. -Jerry
