From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24435C4708C for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2022 15:17:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232897AbiLFPRR (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Dec 2022 10:17:17 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:43994 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S234965AbiLFPQu (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Dec 2022 10:16:50 -0500 Received: from sin.source.kernel.org (sin.source.kernel.org [145.40.73.55]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0D0CC3891; Tue, 6 Dec 2022 07:12:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by sin.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 30206CE19DD; Tue, 6 Dec 2022 15:12:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9EBBDC433D6; Tue, 6 Dec 2022 15:12:30 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1670339554; bh=mGtG2UCNLb8zhz3Q6ArNChI7VGb5eTZ5ueFrfVstXD0=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=bo5y7lUSDSXWfZgfW+OZ4O8LIx502DSwi4Fm4epiyqnYf9KRbYyK7MM8P9H999BGY 6z46l9lxs+KnGbQSjen7JDqvNl4fDQfmIis5sRcSBT2AqRFjWYuGpZ3hSRBwVvmhCG VyOsx743ycHsVK/LN54RaXYDyQo98XtoaWghHq8xYcZjS8pXmcGd0g3kJuwu1u/oxw cJ7sIn8Xo3AsyiurYG6ZVzMgTNkj3Kw8zRGb6NOAzkwjPKrAIZt4WG/yCZ2DAhnjGy FsZ7OMDupxLncDYgSkpRgoBaZOOLI0SD8Z+FQGrIh2FR4tt07STmbuRqCURjK4K53d pAlD9Ibdsvxlw== Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2022 23:02:35 +0800 From: Jisheng Zhang To: Heiko =?utf-8?Q?St=C3=BCbner?= Cc: Conor Dooley , Palmer Dabbelt , Paul Walmsley , Albert Ou , Anup Patel , Atish Patra , Andrew Jones , linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, kvm-riscv@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 01/13] riscv: fix jal offsets in patched alternatives Message-ID: References: <20221204174632.3677-1-jszhang@kernel.org> <10190559.nUPlyArG6x@diego> <12207576.O9o76ZdvQC@diego> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <12207576.O9o76ZdvQC@diego> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: kvm@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Dec 06, 2022 at 01:39:50AM +0100, Heiko Stübner wrote: > Am Montag, 5. Dezember 2022, 20:49:26 CET schrieb Conor Dooley: > > On Mon, Dec 05, 2022 at 07:49:01PM +0100, Heiko Stübner wrote: > > > Am Montag, 5. Dezember 2022, 19:36:45 CET schrieb Conor Dooley: > > > > Heiko, Jisheng, > > > > On Mon, Dec 05, 2022 at 11:40:44PM +0800, Jisheng Zhang wrote: > > > > > Yesterday, I also wanted to unify the two instruction fix into > > > > > one. But that would need to roll back the > > > > > riscv_alternative_fix_auipc_jalr() to your v1 version. And IMHO, > > > > > it's better if you can split the Zbb string optimizations series > > > > > into two: one for alternative improvements, another for Zbb. Then > > > > > we may get the alternative improvements and this inst extension > > > > > series merged in v6.2-rc1. > > > > > > > > Heiko, perhaps you can correct me here: > > > > > > > > Last Wednesday you & Palmer agreed that it was too late in the cycle to > > > > apply any of the stuff touching alternatives? > > > > If I do recall correctly, gives plenty of time to sort out any > > > > interdependent changes here. > > > > > > > > Could easily be misremembering, wouldn't be the first time! > > > > > > You slightly misremembered, but are still correct with the above ;-) . > > > > > > I.e. what we talked about was stuff for fixes for 6.1-rc, were Palmers > > > wisely wanted to limit additions to really easy fixes for the remaining > > > last rc, to not upset any existing boards. > > > > Ahh right. I was 50-50 on whether something like that was said so at > > least I am not going crazy. > > > > > But you are still correct that we also shouldn't target the 6.2 merge window > > > anymore :-) . > > > > > > We're after -rc8 now (which is in itself uncommon) and in his -rc7 > > > announcement [0], Linus stated > > > > > > "[...] the usual rule is that things that I get sent for the > > > merge window should have been all ready _before_ the merge window > > > opened. But with the merge window happening largely during the holiday > > > season, I'll just be enforcing that pretty strictly." > > > > Yah, of all the windows to land patchsets that are being re-spun a few > > days before it opens this probably isn't the best one to pick! > > > > > That means new stuff should be reviewed and in linux-next _way before_ the > > > merge window opens next weekend. Taking into account that people need > > > to review stuff (and maybe the series needing another round), I really don't > > > see this happening this week and everything else will get us shouted at > > > from atop a christmas tree ;-) . > > > > > > That's the reason most maintainer-trees stop accepting stuff after -rc7 Thanks for the information, then we have more time to test and review this series. > > > > Aye, in RISC-V land maybe we will get there one day :) > > > > For the original question though, breaking them up into 3 or 4 smaller > > bits that could get applied on their own is probably a good idea? > > > > Between yourselves, Drew and Prabhakar there's a couple series touching > > the same bits. Certainly don't want to seem like I am speaking for the Because alternative is the best solution to riscv extensions while still keep one unified kernel Image ;) > > Higher Powers here, but some sort of logical ordering would probably be > > a good idea so as not to hold each other up? > > The non-string bit of your series has been fairly well reviewed & would, > > in theory, be mergeable once the tree re-opens? Timing aside, Jisheng's > > idea seems like a good one, no? IMHO, it will be better if Palmer can merge Heiko's alternative improvements into riscv-next once well reviewed and the window is reopen. Then Drew, Prabhakar and I can rebase on that tree. > > yeah, I had that same thought over the weekend - with the generic > part being pretty good in the review and only the string part needing > more work and thus ideally splitting the series [0] . > > Jisheng's series just made that even more important to do :-) > > > Heiko > >