On Mon, Jul 01, 2024 at 10:27:01AM -0500, Samuel Holland wrote:
> Hi Charlie,
>
> On 2024-06-19 6:57 PM, Charlie Jenkins wrote:
> > The D1/D1s SoCs support xtheadvector so it can be included in the
> > devicetree. Also include vlenb for the cpu.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Charlie Jenkins <charlie@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > arch/riscv/boot/dts/allwinner/sun20i-d1s.dtsi | 3 ++-
>
> The other C906/C910/C920-based SoCs need devicetree updates as well, although
> they don't necessarily need to be part of this series:
>
> - sophgo/cv18xx.dtsi
> - sophgo/sg2042-cpus.dtsi
> - thead/th1520.dtsi
Yeah, I think I pointed that out before with the same "escape hatch" of
it not needing to be in the same series.
>
> > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/arch/riscv/boot/dts/allwinner/sun20i-d1s.dtsi b/arch/riscv/boot/dts/allwinner/sun20i-d1s.dtsi
> > index 64c3c2e6cbe0..6367112e614a 100644
> > --- a/arch/riscv/boot/dts/allwinner/sun20i-d1s.dtsi
> > +++ b/arch/riscv/boot/dts/allwinner/sun20i-d1s.dtsi
> > @@ -27,7 +27,8 @@ cpu0: cpu@0 {
> > riscv,isa = "rv64imafdc";
>
> The ISA string should be updated to keep it in sync with riscv,isa-extensions.
This probably looks like this cos I said that the kernel shouldn't parse
vendor extensions from "riscv,isa". My rationale was that we have
basically no control of what a vendor extension means in riscv,isa so
we shouldn't parse them from it (so marginally worse than standard
extensions, where it means what the spec says except when it doesn't).
Given how we implement the parsing, it also meant we weren't implying
meanings for vendor extensions ACPI-land, where we also can't ensure the
meanings or that they remain stable. That change is in a different
series:
https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-riscv/patch/20240609-support_vendor_extensions-v2-1-9a43f1fdcbb9@xxxxxxxxxxxx/
Although now that I think about it, this might break xandespmu... I
dunno if the Andes guys switched over to using the new property outside
of the single dts in the kernel tree using their SoC. We could
potentially special-case that extension if they haven't - but my
position on this mostly is that if you want to use vendor extensions you
should not be using riscv,isa (even if the regex doesn't complain if you
add them). I'd like to leave the code in the other patch as-is if we can
help it.
I added Yu Chien Peter Lin here, maybe they can let us know what they're
doing.
Thanks,
Conor.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
