Re: [PATCH 12/19] riscv: Create xtheadvector file

[Charlie Jenkins <charlie@rivosinc.com>]

On Fri, Apr 12, 2024 at 08:00:46PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 12, 2024 at 11:24:35AM -0700, Charlie Jenkins wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 12, 2024 at 12:30:32PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > > On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 09:11:18PM -0700, Charlie Jenkins wrote:
> > > > These definitions didn't fit anywhere nicely, so create a new file to
> > > > house various xtheadvector instruction encodings.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Charlie Jenkins <charlie@rivosinc.com>
> > > > ---
> > > >  arch/riscv/include/asm/xtheadvector.h | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > >  1 file changed, 25 insertions(+)
> > > > 
> > > > diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/xtheadvector.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/xtheadvector.h
> > > > new file mode 100644
> > > > index 000000000000..348263ea164c
> > > > --- /dev/null
> > > > +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/xtheadvector.h
> > > > @@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
> > > > +/* SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-only */
> > > > +
> > > > +/*
> > > > + * Vector 0.7.1 as used for example on T-Head Xuantie cores, uses an older
> > > > + * encoding for vsetvli (ta, ma vs. d1), so provide an instruction for
> > > > + * vsetvli	t4, x0, e8, m8, d1
> > > > + */
> > > > +#define THEAD_VSETVLI_T4X0E8M8D1	".long	0x00307ed7\n\t"
> > > > +#define THEAD_VSETVLI_X0X0E8M8D1	".long	0x00307057\n\t"
> > > > +
> > > > +/*
> > > > + * While in theory, the vector-0.7.1 vsb.v and vlb.v result in the same
> > > > + * encoding as the standard vse8.v and vle8.v, compilers seem to optimize
> > > > + * the call resulting in a different encoding and then using a value for
> > > > + * the "mop" field that is not part of vector-0.7.1
> > > > + * So encode specific variants for vstate_save and _restore.
> > > 
> > > This wording seems oddly familiar to me, did Heiko not write this?
> > 
> > Yeah, I wasn't sure how to attribute him. He wrote almost all of the
> > lines in this file, but I put it together into this file. What is the
> > standard way of doing that?
> 
> The original patches have his sob and authorship, so I would at least
> expect co-developed-by.

Perfect, thank you for pointing me in the right direction.

- Charlie