Re: [PATCH v5 08/16] riscv: add ISA parsing for Zca, Zcf, Zcd and Zcb

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, 22 May 2024 00:20:09 PDT (-0700), cleger@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:


On 21/05/2024 21:49, Conor Dooley wrote:
On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 04:52:48PM +0200, Clément Léger wrote:

+static int riscv_ext_zca_depends(const struct riscv_isa_ext_data *data,
+				 const unsigned long *isa_bitmap)
+{
+	return __riscv_isa_extension_available(isa_bitmap, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZCA) ? 0 : -EPROBE_DEFER;
+}
+static int riscv_ext_zcd_validate(const struct riscv_isa_ext_data *data,
+				  const unsigned long *isa_bitmap)
+{
+	return __riscv_isa_extension_available(isa_bitmap, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZCA) &&
+	       __riscv_isa_extension_available(isa_bitmap, RISCV_ISA_EXT_d) ? 0 : -EPROBE_DEFER;
+}

Could you write the logic in these out normally please? I think they'd
be more understandable (particular this second one) broken down and with
early return.

Yes sure. I'll probably make the same thing for zcf_validate as well as
removing the #ifdef and using IS_ENABLED():

static int riscv_ext_zcf_validate(const struct riscv_isa_ext_data *data,
				  const unsigned long *isa_bitmap)
{
	if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_64BIT))
		return -EINVAL;

	if (__riscv_isa_extension_available(isa_bitmap, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZCA) &&
	    __riscv_isa_extension_available(isa_bitmap, RISCV_ISA_EXT_f))
	       return 0;

	return -EPROBE_DEFER;
}

Are you going to send a v6 (sorry if I missed it, I'm trying to untangle all these ISA parsing patch sets).



Otherwise,
Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Cheers,
Conor.




[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux FS]     [Yosemite Forum]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Resources]

  Powered by Linux