From: Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com>
To: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
Cc: devicetree@vger.kernel.org, Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, conor@kernel.org,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
palmer@dabbelt.com,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
Heiko Stuebner <heiko.stuebner@vrull.eu>,
Evan Green <evan@rivosinc.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 3/9] RISC-V: shunt isa_ext_arr to cpufeature.c
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2023 17:29:04 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230626-79b06f642aa2996098c9353d@orel> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230626-endowment-crave-d72f9423c5b3@wendy>
On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 12:19:41PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> To facilitate using one struct to define extensions, rather than having
> several, shunt isa_ext_arr to cpufeature.c, where it will be used for
> probing extension presence also.
> As that scope of the array as widened, prefix it with riscv & drop the
> type from the variable name.
>
> Since the new array is const, print_isa() needs a wee bit of cleanup to
> avoid complaints about losing the const qualifier.
>
> Signed-off-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
> ---
> arch/riscv/include/asm/hwcap.h | 3 ++
> arch/riscv/kernel/cpu.c | 75 +---------------------------------
> arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c | 68 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 73 insertions(+), 73 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/hwcap.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/hwcap.h
> index f041bfa7f6a0..7a57e6109aef 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/hwcap.h
> +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/hwcap.h
> @@ -76,6 +76,9 @@ struct riscv_isa_ext_data {
> unsigned int isa_ext_id;
> };
>
> +extern const struct riscv_isa_ext_data riscv_isa_ext[];
> +extern const size_t riscv_isa_ext_count;
> +
> unsigned long riscv_isa_extension_base(const unsigned long *isa_bitmap);
>
> #define riscv_isa_extension_mask(ext) BIT_MASK(RISCV_ISA_EXT_##ext)
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpu.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpu.c
> index 01f7e5c62997..61fb92e7d524 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpu.c
> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpu.c
> @@ -160,81 +160,10 @@ arch_initcall(riscv_cpuinfo_init);
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_PROC_FS
>
> -#define __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(UPROP, EXTID) \
> - { \
> - .uprop = #UPROP, \
> - .isa_ext_id = EXTID, \
> - }
> -
> -/*
> - * The canonical order of ISA extension names in the ISA string is defined in
> - * chapter 27 of the unprivileged specification.
> - *
> - * Ordinarily, for in-kernel data structures, this order is unimportant but
> - * isa_ext_arr defines the order of the ISA string in /proc/cpuinfo.
> - *
> - * The specification uses vague wording, such as should, when it comes to
> - * ordering, so for our purposes the following rules apply:
> - *
> - * 1. All multi-letter extensions must be separated from other extensions by an
> - * underscore.
> - *
> - * 2. Additional standard extensions (starting with 'Z') must be sorted after
> - * single-letter extensions and before any higher-privileged extensions.
> -
> - * 3. The first letter following the 'Z' conventionally indicates the most
> - * closely related alphabetical extension category, IMAFDQLCBKJTPVH.
> - * If multiple 'Z' extensions are named, they must be ordered first by
> - * category, then alphabetically within a category.
> - *
> - * 3. Standard supervisor-level extensions (starting with 'S') must be listed
> - * after standard unprivileged extensions. If multiple supervisor-level
> - * extensions are listed, they must be ordered alphabetically.
> - *
> - * 4. Standard machine-level extensions (starting with 'Zxm') must be listed
> - * after any lower-privileged, standard extensions. If multiple
> - * machine-level extensions are listed, they must be ordered
> - * alphabetically.
> - *
> - * 5. Non-standard extensions (starting with 'X') must be listed after all
> - * standard extensions. If multiple non-standard extensions are listed, they
> - * must be ordered alphabetically.
> - *
> - * An example string following the order is:
> - * rv64imadc_zifoo_zigoo_zafoo_sbar_scar_zxmbaz_xqux_xrux
> - *
> - * New entries to this struct should follow the ordering rules described above.
> - */
> -static struct riscv_isa_ext_data isa_ext_arr[] = {
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zicbom, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICBOM),
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zicboz, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICBOZ),
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zicntr, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICNTR),
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zicsr, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICSR),
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zifencei, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZIFENCEI),
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zihintpause, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZIHINTPAUSE),
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zihpm, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZIHPM),
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zba, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBA),
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zbb, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBB),
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zbs, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBS),
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(smaia, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SMAIA),
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(ssaia, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SSAIA),
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(sscofpmf, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SSCOFPMF),
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(sstc, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SSTC),
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(svinval, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SVINVAL),
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(svnapot, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SVNAPOT),
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(svpbmt, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SVPBMT),
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA("", RISCV_ISA_EXT_MAX),
> -};
> -
> static void print_isa_ext(struct seq_file *f)
> {
> - struct riscv_isa_ext_data *edata;
> - int i = 0, arr_sz;
> -
> - arr_sz = ARRAY_SIZE(isa_ext_arr) - 1;
> -
> - for (i = 0; i <= arr_sz; i++) {
> - edata = &isa_ext_arr[i];
> + for (int i = 0; i < riscv_isa_ext_count; i++) {
> + const struct riscv_isa_ext_data *edata = &riscv_isa_ext[i];
> if (!__riscv_isa_extension_available(NULL, edata->isa_ext_id))
> continue;
> seq_printf(f, "_%s", edata->uprop);
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
> index bdcf460ea53d..f0ae310006de 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
> @@ -99,6 +99,74 @@ static bool riscv_isa_extension_check(int id)
> return true;
> }
>
> +#define __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(UPROP, EXTID) \
> + { \
> + .uprop = #UPROP, \
> + .isa_ext_id = EXTID, \
> + }
> +
> +/*
> + * The canonical order of ISA extension names in the ISA string is defined in
> + * chapter 27 of the unprivileged specification.
> + *
> + * Ordinarily, for in-kernel data structures, this order is unimportant but
> + * isa_ext_arr defines the order of the ISA string in /proc/cpuinfo.
> + *
> + * The specification uses vague wording, such as should, when it comes to
> + * ordering, so for our purposes the following rules apply:
> + *
> + * 1. All multi-letter extensions must be separated from other extensions by an
> + * underscore.
> + *
> + * 2. Additional standard extensions (starting with 'Z') must be sorted after
> + * single-letter extensions and before any higher-privileged extensions.
> + *
> + * 3. The first letter following the 'Z' conventionally indicates the most
> + * closely related alphabetical extension category, IMAFDQLCBKJTPVH.
> + * If multiple 'Z' extensions are named, they must be ordered first by
> + * category, then alphabetically within a category.
> + *
> + * 3. Standard supervisor-level extensions (starting with 'S') must be listed
> + * after standard unprivileged extensions. If multiple supervisor-level
> + * extensions are listed, they must be ordered alphabetically.
> + *
> + * 4. Standard machine-level extensions (starting with 'Zxm') must be listed
> + * after any lower-privileged, standard extensions. If multiple
> + * machine-level extensions are listed, they must be ordered
> + * alphabetically.
> + *
> + * 5. Non-standard extensions (starting with 'X') must be listed after all
> + * standard extensions. If multiple non-standard extensions are listed, they
> + * must be ordered alphabetically.
> + *
> + * An example string following the order is:
> + * rv64imadc_zifoo_zigoo_zafoo_sbar_scar_zxmbaz_xqux_xrux
> + *
> + * New entries to this struct should follow the ordering rules described above.
> + */
> +const struct riscv_isa_ext_data riscv_isa_ext[] = {
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zicbom, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICBOM),
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zicboz, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICBOZ),
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zicntr, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICNTR),
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zicsr, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICSR),
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zifencei, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZIFENCEI),
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zihintpause, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZIHINTPAUSE),
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zihpm, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZIHPM),
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zba, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBA),
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zbb, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBB),
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zbs, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBS),
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(smaia, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SMAIA),
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(ssaia, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SSAIA),
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(sscofpmf, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SSCOFPMF),
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(sstc, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SSTC),
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(svinval, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SVINVAL),
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(svnapot, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SVNAPOT),
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(svpbmt, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SVPBMT),
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA("", RISCV_ISA_EXT_MAX),
I think we can either drop this null entry or drop the count variable
below. My preference would be to drop the count variable, and always
loop to the null.
> +};
> +
> +const size_t riscv_isa_ext_count = ARRAY_SIZE(riscv_isa_ext);
> +
> void __init riscv_fill_hwcap(void)
> {
> struct device_node *node;
> --
> 2.40.1
>
Otherwise,
Reviewed-by: Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com>
Thanks,
drew
_______________________________________________
linux-riscv mailing list
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com>
To: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
Cc: palmer@dabbelt.com, conor@kernel.org,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@eecs.berkeley.edu>,
Heiko Stuebner <heiko.stuebner@vrull.eu>,
Evan Green <evan@rivosinc.com>,
Sunil V L <sunilvl@ventanamicro.com>,
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 3/9] RISC-V: shunt isa_ext_arr to cpufeature.c
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2023 17:29:04 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230626-79b06f642aa2996098c9353d@orel> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230626-endowment-crave-d72f9423c5b3@wendy>
On Mon, Jun 26, 2023 at 12:19:41PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> To facilitate using one struct to define extensions, rather than having
> several, shunt isa_ext_arr to cpufeature.c, where it will be used for
> probing extension presence also.
> As that scope of the array as widened, prefix it with riscv & drop the
> type from the variable name.
>
> Since the new array is const, print_isa() needs a wee bit of cleanup to
> avoid complaints about losing the const qualifier.
>
> Signed-off-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
> ---
> arch/riscv/include/asm/hwcap.h | 3 ++
> arch/riscv/kernel/cpu.c | 75 +---------------------------------
> arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c | 68 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 3 files changed, 73 insertions(+), 73 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/hwcap.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/hwcap.h
> index f041bfa7f6a0..7a57e6109aef 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/hwcap.h
> +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/hwcap.h
> @@ -76,6 +76,9 @@ struct riscv_isa_ext_data {
> unsigned int isa_ext_id;
> };
>
> +extern const struct riscv_isa_ext_data riscv_isa_ext[];
> +extern const size_t riscv_isa_ext_count;
> +
> unsigned long riscv_isa_extension_base(const unsigned long *isa_bitmap);
>
> #define riscv_isa_extension_mask(ext) BIT_MASK(RISCV_ISA_EXT_##ext)
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpu.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpu.c
> index 01f7e5c62997..61fb92e7d524 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpu.c
> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpu.c
> @@ -160,81 +160,10 @@ arch_initcall(riscv_cpuinfo_init);
>
> #ifdef CONFIG_PROC_FS
>
> -#define __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(UPROP, EXTID) \
> - { \
> - .uprop = #UPROP, \
> - .isa_ext_id = EXTID, \
> - }
> -
> -/*
> - * The canonical order of ISA extension names in the ISA string is defined in
> - * chapter 27 of the unprivileged specification.
> - *
> - * Ordinarily, for in-kernel data structures, this order is unimportant but
> - * isa_ext_arr defines the order of the ISA string in /proc/cpuinfo.
> - *
> - * The specification uses vague wording, such as should, when it comes to
> - * ordering, so for our purposes the following rules apply:
> - *
> - * 1. All multi-letter extensions must be separated from other extensions by an
> - * underscore.
> - *
> - * 2. Additional standard extensions (starting with 'Z') must be sorted after
> - * single-letter extensions and before any higher-privileged extensions.
> -
> - * 3. The first letter following the 'Z' conventionally indicates the most
> - * closely related alphabetical extension category, IMAFDQLCBKJTPVH.
> - * If multiple 'Z' extensions are named, they must be ordered first by
> - * category, then alphabetically within a category.
> - *
> - * 3. Standard supervisor-level extensions (starting with 'S') must be listed
> - * after standard unprivileged extensions. If multiple supervisor-level
> - * extensions are listed, they must be ordered alphabetically.
> - *
> - * 4. Standard machine-level extensions (starting with 'Zxm') must be listed
> - * after any lower-privileged, standard extensions. If multiple
> - * machine-level extensions are listed, they must be ordered
> - * alphabetically.
> - *
> - * 5. Non-standard extensions (starting with 'X') must be listed after all
> - * standard extensions. If multiple non-standard extensions are listed, they
> - * must be ordered alphabetically.
> - *
> - * An example string following the order is:
> - * rv64imadc_zifoo_zigoo_zafoo_sbar_scar_zxmbaz_xqux_xrux
> - *
> - * New entries to this struct should follow the ordering rules described above.
> - */
> -static struct riscv_isa_ext_data isa_ext_arr[] = {
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zicbom, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICBOM),
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zicboz, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICBOZ),
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zicntr, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICNTR),
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zicsr, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICSR),
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zifencei, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZIFENCEI),
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zihintpause, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZIHINTPAUSE),
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zihpm, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZIHPM),
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zba, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBA),
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zbb, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBB),
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zbs, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBS),
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(smaia, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SMAIA),
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(ssaia, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SSAIA),
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(sscofpmf, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SSCOFPMF),
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(sstc, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SSTC),
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(svinval, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SVINVAL),
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(svnapot, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SVNAPOT),
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(svpbmt, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SVPBMT),
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA("", RISCV_ISA_EXT_MAX),
> -};
> -
> static void print_isa_ext(struct seq_file *f)
> {
> - struct riscv_isa_ext_data *edata;
> - int i = 0, arr_sz;
> -
> - arr_sz = ARRAY_SIZE(isa_ext_arr) - 1;
> -
> - for (i = 0; i <= arr_sz; i++) {
> - edata = &isa_ext_arr[i];
> + for (int i = 0; i < riscv_isa_ext_count; i++) {
> + const struct riscv_isa_ext_data *edata = &riscv_isa_ext[i];
> if (!__riscv_isa_extension_available(NULL, edata->isa_ext_id))
> continue;
> seq_printf(f, "_%s", edata->uprop);
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
> index bdcf460ea53d..f0ae310006de 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
> @@ -99,6 +99,74 @@ static bool riscv_isa_extension_check(int id)
> return true;
> }
>
> +#define __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(UPROP, EXTID) \
> + { \
> + .uprop = #UPROP, \
> + .isa_ext_id = EXTID, \
> + }
> +
> +/*
> + * The canonical order of ISA extension names in the ISA string is defined in
> + * chapter 27 of the unprivileged specification.
> + *
> + * Ordinarily, for in-kernel data structures, this order is unimportant but
> + * isa_ext_arr defines the order of the ISA string in /proc/cpuinfo.
> + *
> + * The specification uses vague wording, such as should, when it comes to
> + * ordering, so for our purposes the following rules apply:
> + *
> + * 1. All multi-letter extensions must be separated from other extensions by an
> + * underscore.
> + *
> + * 2. Additional standard extensions (starting with 'Z') must be sorted after
> + * single-letter extensions and before any higher-privileged extensions.
> + *
> + * 3. The first letter following the 'Z' conventionally indicates the most
> + * closely related alphabetical extension category, IMAFDQLCBKJTPVH.
> + * If multiple 'Z' extensions are named, they must be ordered first by
> + * category, then alphabetically within a category.
> + *
> + * 3. Standard supervisor-level extensions (starting with 'S') must be listed
> + * after standard unprivileged extensions. If multiple supervisor-level
> + * extensions are listed, they must be ordered alphabetically.
> + *
> + * 4. Standard machine-level extensions (starting with 'Zxm') must be listed
> + * after any lower-privileged, standard extensions. If multiple
> + * machine-level extensions are listed, they must be ordered
> + * alphabetically.
> + *
> + * 5. Non-standard extensions (starting with 'X') must be listed after all
> + * standard extensions. If multiple non-standard extensions are listed, they
> + * must be ordered alphabetically.
> + *
> + * An example string following the order is:
> + * rv64imadc_zifoo_zigoo_zafoo_sbar_scar_zxmbaz_xqux_xrux
> + *
> + * New entries to this struct should follow the ordering rules described above.
> + */
> +const struct riscv_isa_ext_data riscv_isa_ext[] = {
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zicbom, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICBOM),
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zicboz, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICBOZ),
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zicntr, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICNTR),
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zicsr, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICSR),
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zifencei, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZIFENCEI),
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zihintpause, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZIHINTPAUSE),
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zihpm, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZIHPM),
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zba, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBA),
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zbb, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBB),
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zbs, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBS),
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(smaia, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SMAIA),
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(ssaia, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SSAIA),
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(sscofpmf, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SSCOFPMF),
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(sstc, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SSTC),
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(svinval, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SVINVAL),
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(svnapot, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SVNAPOT),
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(svpbmt, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SVPBMT),
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA("", RISCV_ISA_EXT_MAX),
I think we can either drop this null entry or drop the count variable
below. My preference would be to drop the count variable, and always
loop to the null.
> +};
> +
> +const size_t riscv_isa_ext_count = ARRAY_SIZE(riscv_isa_ext);
> +
> void __init riscv_fill_hwcap(void)
> {
> struct device_node *node;
> --
> 2.40.1
>
Otherwise,
Reviewed-by: Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com>
Thanks,
drew
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-06-26 15:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 66+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-06-26 11:19 [PATCH v1 0/9] RISC-V: Probe DT extension support using riscv,isa-extensions & riscv,isa-base Conor Dooley
2023-06-26 11:19 ` Conor Dooley
2023-06-26 11:19 ` [PATCH v1 1/9] RISC-V: don't parse dt/acpi isa string to get rv32/rv64 Conor Dooley
2023-06-26 11:19 ` Conor Dooley
2023-06-26 15:14 ` Andrew Jones
2023-06-26 15:14 ` Andrew Jones
2023-06-26 15:51 ` Conor Dooley
2023-06-26 15:51 ` Conor Dooley
2023-06-26 16:05 ` Andrew Jones
2023-06-26 16:05 ` Andrew Jones
2023-06-26 16:16 ` Conor Dooley
2023-06-26 16:16 ` Conor Dooley
2023-06-27 8:02 ` Sunil V L
2023-06-27 8:02 ` Sunil V L
2023-06-27 8:51 ` Conor Dooley
2023-06-27 8:51 ` Conor Dooley
2023-06-27 9:20 ` Sunil V L
2023-06-27 9:20 ` Sunil V L
2023-06-26 11:19 ` [PATCH v1 2/9] RISC-V: drop a needless check in print_isa_ext() Conor Dooley
2023-06-26 11:19 ` Conor Dooley
2023-06-26 15:19 ` Andrew Jones
2023-06-26 15:19 ` Andrew Jones
2023-06-26 16:08 ` Conor Dooley
2023-06-26 16:08 ` Conor Dooley
2023-06-26 16:29 ` Andrew Jones
2023-06-26 16:29 ` Andrew Jones
2023-06-26 11:19 ` [PATCH v1 3/9] RISC-V: shunt isa_ext_arr to cpufeature.c Conor Dooley
2023-06-26 11:19 ` Conor Dooley
2023-06-26 15:29 ` Andrew Jones [this message]
2023-06-26 15:29 ` Andrew Jones
2023-06-26 15:44 ` Andrew Jones
2023-06-26 15:44 ` Andrew Jones
2023-06-26 15:59 ` Conor Dooley
2023-06-26 15:59 ` Conor Dooley
2023-06-26 11:19 ` [PATCH v1 4/9] RISC-V: repurpose riscv_isa_ext array in riscv_fill_hwcap() Conor Dooley
2023-06-26 11:19 ` Conor Dooley
2023-06-26 15:33 ` Andrew Jones
2023-06-26 15:33 ` Andrew Jones
2023-06-26 11:19 ` [PATCH v1 5/9] RISC-V: add missing single letter extension definitions Conor Dooley
2023-06-26 11:19 ` Conor Dooley
2023-06-26 15:34 ` Andrew Jones
2023-06-26 15:34 ` Andrew Jones
2023-06-26 11:19 ` [PATCH v1 6/9] RISC-V: add single letter extensions to riscv_isa_ext Conor Dooley
2023-06-26 11:19 ` Conor Dooley
2023-06-26 15:42 ` Andrew Jones
2023-06-26 15:42 ` Andrew Jones
2023-06-28 17:33 ` Evan Green
2023-06-28 17:33 ` Evan Green
2023-06-28 17:43 ` Conor Dooley
2023-06-28 17:43 ` Conor Dooley
2023-06-28 17:50 ` Evan Green
2023-06-28 17:50 ` Evan Green
2023-06-26 11:19 ` [PATCH v1 7/9] RISC-V: split riscv_fill_hwcap() in 3 Conor Dooley
2023-06-26 11:19 ` Conor Dooley
2023-06-26 16:17 ` Andrew Jones
2023-06-26 16:17 ` Andrew Jones
2023-06-27 17:42 ` Conor Dooley
2023-06-27 17:42 ` Conor Dooley
2023-06-26 11:19 ` [PATCH v1 8/9] RISC-V: enable extension detection from new properties Conor Dooley
2023-06-26 11:19 ` Conor Dooley
2023-06-26 16:24 ` Andrew Jones
2023-06-26 16:24 ` Andrew Jones
2023-06-26 11:19 ` [PATCH v1 9/9] RISC-V: try new extension properties in of_early_processor_hartid() Conor Dooley
2023-06-26 11:19 ` Conor Dooley
2023-06-26 16:25 ` Andrew Jones
2023-06-26 16:25 ` Andrew Jones
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20230626-79b06f642aa2996098c9353d@orel \
--to=ajones@ventanamicro.com \
--cc=aou@eecs.berkeley.edu \
--cc=conor.dooley@microchip.com \
--cc=conor@kernel.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=evan@rivosinc.com \
--cc=heiko.stuebner@vrull.eu \
--cc=krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@linaro.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
--cc=paul.walmsley@sifive.com \
--cc=robh+dt@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.