Re: [PATCH 07/10] riscv: add ISA extension parsing for Zcmop

Conor Dooley
2024-04-16T14:54:50Z

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4065 bytes --]

On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 11:10:24AM +0200, Clément Léger wrote:
>
>
> On 11/04/2024 13:53, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 11:08:21AM +0200, Clément Léger wrote:
> >>>> If we consider to have potentially broken isa string (ie extensions
> >>>> dependencies not correctly handled), then we'll need some way to
> >>>> validate this within the kernel.
> >>>
> >>> No, the DT passed to the kernel should be correct and we by and large we
> >>> should not have to do validation of it. What I meant above was writing
> >>> the binding so that something invalid will not pass dtbs_check.
> >>
> >> Acked, I was mainly answering Deepak question about dependencies wrt to
> >> using __RISCV_ISA_EXT_SUPERSET() which does not seems to be relevant
> >> since we expect a correct isa string to be passed.
> >
> > Ahh, okay.
> >
> >> But as you stated, DT
> >> validation clearly make sense. I think a lot of extensions strings would
> >> benefit such support (All the Zv* depends on V, etc).
> >
> > I think it is actually as simple something like this, which makes it
> > invalid to have "d" without "f":
> >
> > | diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/extensions.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/extensions.yaml
> > | index 468c646247aa..594828700cbe 100644
> > | --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/extensions.yaml
> > | +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/extensions.yaml
> > | @@ -484,5 +484,20 @@ properties:
> > | Registers in the AX45MP datasheet.
> > | https://www.andestech.com/wp-content/uploads/AX45MP-1C-Rev.-5.0.0-Datasheet.pdf
> > |
> > | +allOf:
> > | + - if:
> > | + properties:
> > | + riscv,isa-extensions:
> > | + contains:
> > | + const: "d"
> > | + not:
> > | + contains:
> > | + const: "f"
> > | + then:
> > | + properties:
> > | + riscv,isa-extensions:
> > | + false
> > | +
> > | +
> > | additionalProperties: true
> > | ...
> >
> > If you do have d without f, the checker will say:
> > cpu@2: riscv,isa-extensions: False schema does not allow ['i', 'm', 'a', 'd', 'c']
> >
> > At least that's readable, even though not clear about what to do. I wish
>
> That looks really readable indeed but the messages that result from
> errors are not so informative.
>
> It tried playing with various constructs and found this one to yield a
> comprehensive message:
>
> +allOf:
> + - if:
> + properties:
> + riscv,isa-extensions:
> + contains:
> + const: zcf
> + not:
> + contains:
> + const: zca
> + then:
> + properties:
> + riscv,isa-extensions:
> + items:
> + anyOf:
> + - const: zca
>
> arch/riscv/boot/dts/allwinner/sun20i-d1-dongshan-nezha-stu.dtb: cpu@0:
> riscv,isa-extensions:10: 'anyOf' conditional failed, one must be fixed:
> 'zca' was expected
> from schema $id: http://devicetree.org/schemas/riscv/extensions.yaml
>
> Even though dt-bindings-check passed, not sure if this is totally a
> valid construct though...

I asked Rob about this yesterday, he suggested adding:
riscv,isa-extensions:
if:
contains:
const: zcf
then:
contains:
const: zca
to the existing property, not in an allOf. I think that is by far the
most readable version in terms of what goes into the binding. The output
would look like:
cpu@0: riscv,isa-extensions: ['i', 'm', 'a', 'd', 'c'] does not contain items matching the given schema
(for d requiring f cos I am lazy)

Also, his comment about your one that gives the nice message was that it
would wrong as the anyOf was pointless and it says all items must be
"zca". I didn't try it, but I have a feeling your nice output will be
rather less nice if several different deps are unmet - but hey, probably
will still be better than having an undocumented extension!

[-- Attachment #1.2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 228 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 161 bytes --]