From: "Clément Léger" <cleger@rivosinc.com>
To: Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org>, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
Cc: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>,
Rob Herring <robh@kernel.org>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzk+dt@kernel.org>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@sifive.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
Andy Chiu <andybnac@gmail.com>,
devicetree@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC v1 2/5] RISC-V: add f & d extension validation checks
Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2024 09:49:51 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6b735be2-93d2-4cc2-b690-438f6e71cf0b@rivosinc.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20241002-stuffed-trance-1323386dd80b@spud>
On 02/10/2024 18:10, Conor Dooley wrote:
> From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
>
> Using Clement's new validation callbacks, support checking that
> dependencies have been satisfied for the floating point extensions.
>
> The check for "d" might be slightly confusingly shorter than that of "f",
> despite "d" depending on "f". This is because the requirement that a
> hart supporting double precision must also support single precision,
> should be validated by dt-bindings etc, not the kernel but lack of
> support for single precision only is a limitation of the kernel.
>
> Since vector will now be disabled proactively, there's no need to clear
> the bit in elf_hwcap in riscv_fill_hwcap() any longer.
>
> Signed-off-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@microchip.com>
> ---
> arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c | 36 +++++++++++++++++++++++-----------
> 1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
> index 84a2ad2581cb0..b8a22ee76c2ef 100644
> --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
> +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
> @@ -101,6 +101,29 @@ static int riscv_ext_zicboz_validate(const struct riscv_isa_ext_data *data,
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static int riscv_ext_f_validate(const struct riscv_isa_ext_data *data,
> + const unsigned long *isa_bitmap)
> +{
> + if (!__riscv_isa_extension_available(isa_bitmap, RISCV_ISA_EXT_d)) {
> + pr_warn_once("This kernel does not support systems with F but not D\n");
> + return -EINVAL;
> + }
> +
> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_FPU))
> + return -EINVAL;
Hey Conor,
Shouldn't this be !IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_FPU)) ? I mean, if the f extension
is enabled but not CONFIG_FPU, then disable it.
Clément
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int riscv_ext_d_validate(const struct riscv_isa_ext_data *data,
> + const unsigned long *isa_bitmap)
> +{
> + if (IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_FPU))
> + return -EINVAL;
> +
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> static int riscv_ext_vector_x_validate(const struct riscv_isa_ext_data *data,
> const unsigned long *isa_bitmap)
> {
> @@ -351,8 +374,8 @@ const struct riscv_isa_ext_data riscv_isa_ext[] = {
> __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(i, RISCV_ISA_EXT_i),
> __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(m, RISCV_ISA_EXT_m),
> __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(a, RISCV_ISA_EXT_a),
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(f, RISCV_ISA_EXT_f),
> - __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(d, RISCV_ISA_EXT_d),
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA_VALIDATE(f, RISCV_ISA_EXT_f, riscv_ext_f_validate),
> + __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA_VALIDATE(d, RISCV_ISA_EXT_d, riscv_ext_d_validate),
> __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(q, RISCV_ISA_EXT_q),
> __RISCV_ISA_EXT_SUPERSET(c, RISCV_ISA_EXT_c, riscv_c_exts),
> __RISCV_ISA_EXT_SUPERSET_VALIDATE(v, RISCV_ISA_EXT_v, riscv_v_exts, riscv_ext_vector_float_validate),
> @@ -912,15 +935,6 @@ void __init riscv_fill_hwcap(void)
> }
> }
>
> - /*
> - * We don't support systems with F but without D, so mask those out
> - * here.
> - */
> - if ((elf_hwcap & COMPAT_HWCAP_ISA_F) && !(elf_hwcap & COMPAT_HWCAP_ISA_D)) {
> - pr_info("This kernel does not support systems with F but not D\n");
> - elf_hwcap &= ~COMPAT_HWCAP_ISA_F;
> - }
> -
> if (__riscv_isa_extension_available(NULL, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZVE32X)) {
> /*
> * This cannot fail when called on the boot hart
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-10-03 7:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-10-02 16:10 [RFC v1 0/5] Add some validation for vector, vector crypto and fp stuff Conor Dooley
2024-10-02 16:10 ` [RFC v1 1/5] RISC-V: add vector crypto extension validation checks Conor Dooley
2024-10-02 16:10 ` [RFC v1 2/5] RISC-V: add f & d " Conor Dooley
2024-10-03 7:49 ` Clément Léger [this message]
2024-10-03 10:57 ` Conor Dooley
2024-10-02 16:10 ` [RFC v1 3/5] dt-bindings: riscv: d requires f Conor Dooley
2024-10-03 7:46 ` Clément Léger
2024-10-03 9:50 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2024-10-02 16:10 ` [RFC v1 4/5] dt-bindings: riscv: add vector sub-extension dependencies Conor Dooley
2024-10-03 7:52 ` Clément Léger
2024-10-03 9:52 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
2024-10-02 16:10 ` [RFC v1 5/5] dt-bindings: riscv: document vector crypto requirements Conor Dooley
2024-10-03 7:59 ` Clément Léger
2024-10-03 11:05 ` Conor Dooley
2024-10-03 11:36 ` Clément Léger
2024-10-03 9:52 ` Krzysztof Kozlowski
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=6b735be2-93d2-4cc2-b690-438f6e71cf0b@rivosinc.com \
--to=cleger@rivosinc.com \
--cc=andybnac@gmail.com \
--cc=conor.dooley@microchip.com \
--cc=conor@kernel.org \
--cc=devicetree@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=krzk+dt@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
--cc=paul.walmsley@sifive.com \
--cc=robh@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox