Re: [PATCH] riscv: Add RISC-V svpbmt extension

[Nick Kossifidis <mick@ics.forth.gr>]

Στις 2021-09-23 12:42, Nick Kossifidis έγραψε:
> Στις 2021-09-23 12:37, Anup Patel έγραψε:
>> On Thu, Sep 23, 2021 at 2:55 PM Nick Kossifidis <mick@ics.forth.gr> 
>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> Hello Guo,
>>> 
>>> Στις 2021-09-23 10:27, guoren@kernel.org έγραψε:
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/cpus.yaml
>>> b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/cpus.yaml
>>> index e534f6a7cfa1..1825cd8db0de 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/cpus.yaml
>>> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/cpus.yaml
>>> @@ -56,7 +56,9 @@ properties:
>>>       enum:
>>>         - riscv,sv32
>>>         - riscv,sv39
>>> +      - riscv,sv39,svpbmt
>>>         - riscv,sv48
>>> +      - riscv,sv48,svpbmt
>>>         - riscv,none
>>> 
>>> Isn't svpbmt orthogonal to the mmu type ? It's a functionality that 
>>> can
>>> be present on either sv39/48/57 so why not have another "svpbmt"
>>> property directly on the cpu node ?
>> 
>> Actually, "mmu-type" would be a good place because it's page based
>> memory attribute and paging can't exist without mmu translation mode.
>> 
>> Also, "svpmbt" is indeed a CPU property so has to be feature 
>> individual
>> CPU node. Hypothetically, a heterogeneous system is possible where
>> some CPUs have "svpmbt" and some CPUs don't have "svpmbt". For
>> example, a future FUxxx SoC might have a E-core and few S-cores
>> where S-cores have Svpmbt whereas E-core does not have Svpmbt
>> because it's an embedded core.
>> 
> 
> I should say cpuX node, not the root /cpu node. We can have an svpbmt
> property in the same way we have an mmu-type property.
> 

I'm also thinking of future mmu-related extensions, e.g. what about 
svnapot ? Should we have mmu-type be riscv,sv39,svnapot and e.g. 
riscv.sv39,svpbmt,svnapot ? It'll become messy.

Regards,
Nick