Re: [PATCH v9 1/3] riscv: mm: modify pte format for Svnapot

From: Conor Dooley <conor@kernel.org>
To: panqinglin2020@iscas.ac.cn, palmer@dabbelt.com
Cc: palmer@dabbelt.com, linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org,
	jeff@riscv.org, xuyinan@ict.ac.cn, ajones@ventanamicro.com,
	alex@ghiti.fr, jszhang@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 1/3] riscv: mm: modify pte format for Svnapot
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2022 19:56:39 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y4+ed14keB29fM2Y@spud> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20221204141137.691790-2-panqinglin2020@iscas.ac.cn>

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1112 bytes --]

Palmer,

On Sun, Dec 04, 2022 at 10:11:35PM +0800, panqinglin2020@iscas.ac.cn wrote:
> From: Qinglin Pan <panqinglin2020@iscas.ac.cn>
> +config RISCV_ISA_SVNAPOT
> +	bool "SVNAPOT extension support"
> +	depends on 64BIT && MMU
> +	select RISCV_ALTERNATIVE
> +	default y
> +	help
> +	  Allow kernel to detect SVNAPOT ISA-extension dynamically in boot time
> +	  and enable its usage.
> +
> +	  SVNAPOT extension helps to mark contiguous PTEs as a range
> +	  of contiguous virtual-to-physical translations, with a naturally
> +	  aligned power-of-2 (NAPOT) granularity larger than the base 4KB page
> +	  size.

RMK's perl script that I yoinked complains about this patch,
specifically that it expects the order:
depends
default
select

The patch I sent out for the select order the other day also switches
everything to this ordering:
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20221202131034.66674-1-conor@kernel.org/

Is that sane? Certainly for the really long lists that order works well,
but idk about the short ones. Unless you feel strongly otherwise, maybe
we should enforce that order for uniformity?

Thanks,
Conor.

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

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

_______________________________________________
linux-riscv mailing list
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv