Re: [PATCH v7 09/13] riscv: vector: Support xtheadvector save/restore

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

 



On Wed, Jul 24, 2024 at 08:23:27PM -0700, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Jul 2024 12:14:00 PDT (-0700), Charlie Jenkins wrote:
> > Use alternatives to add support for xtheadvector vector save/restore
> > routines.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Charlie Jenkins <charlie@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> 
> b4 isn't applying this, either on top of your last patch set or rc1 -- the
> base commit in the header isn't a hash I have, so I'm not sure where it's
> mean to apply to.
> 
> Also...
> 
> > ---
> >  arch/riscv/include/asm/csr.h           |   6 +
> >  arch/riscv/include/asm/switch_to.h     |   2 +-
> >  arch/riscv/include/asm/vector.h        | 225 +++++++++++++++++++++++++--------
> >  arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c         |   5 +-
> >  arch/riscv/kernel/kernel_mode_vector.c |   8 +-
> >  arch/riscv/kernel/process.c            |   4 +-
> >  arch/riscv/kernel/signal.c             |   6 +-
> >  arch/riscv/kernel/vector.c             |  12 +-
> >  8 files changed, 198 insertions(+), 70 deletions(-)
> 
> [...]
> 
> > diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > index bf25215bad24..cb48092fdc5d 100644
> > --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > @@ -845,10 +845,7 @@ static int __init riscv_fill_hwcap_from_ext_list(unsigned long *isa2hwcap)
> >  			riscv_isa_set_ext(ext, source_isa);
> >  		}
> > 
> > -<<<<<<< HEAD
> >  		riscv_resolve_isa(source_isa, isainfo->isa, &this_hwcap, isa2hwcap);
> > -=======
> > ->>>>>>> 0f260ac829ca (riscv: Extend cpufeature.c to detect vendor extensions)
> >  		riscv_fill_cpu_vendor_ext(cpu_node, cpu);
> > 
> >  		of_node_put(cpu_node);
> 
> This chunk isn't applying, and it's got a conflict marker in there.  So I
> think that means something's gone off the rails?

I really messed that up... Okay I sent a new version that is based off
of your for-next that should work?

- Charlie





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Wireless]     [Linux Kernel]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux