Re: [PATCH 1/3] RISC-V: add Bitmanip/Scalar Crypto parsing from DT

["Hongren (Zenithal) Zheng" <i@zenithal.me>]

On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 07:48:15PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 11:14:30AM -0700, Evan Green wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 7:38 AM Samuel Ortiz <sameo@rivosinc.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > From: "Hongren (Zenithal) Zheng" <i@zenithal.me>
> > >
> > > This patch parses Zb/Zk related string from DT and
> 
> %s/This patch//
> 
> > > output them in cpuinfo
> > >
> > > One thing worth noting is that if DT provides zk,
> > > all zbkb, zbkc, zbkx and zkn, zkr, zkt would be enabled.
> 
> Please explain why this is okay.

From riscv scalar crypto spec, zk is a shorthand
for zkn, zkr and zkt and zkn also includes zbkb, zbkc
and zbkx.

> 
> > > Note that zk is a valid extension name and the current
> > > DT binding spec allows this.
> > >
> > > This patch also changes the logical id of
> > > existing multi-letter extensions and adds a statement
> > > that instead of logical id compatibility, the order
> > > is needed.
> 
> Does it?

That is in the old version of this patch,
should be removed now
see https://lore.kernel.org/linux-riscv/YqY0aSngjI0Hc5d4@Sun/

> 
> > > There currently lacks a mechanism to merge them when
> > > producing cpuinfo. Namely if you provide a riscv,isa
> > > "rv64imafdc_zk_zks", the cpuinfo output would be
> > > "rv64imafdc_zbkb_zbkc_zbkx_zknd_zkne_zknh_zkr_zksed
> > > _zksh_zkt"
> 
> I think this is fine.
> 
> Please re-wrap this all to 72 characters.
> 
> > >
> > > Tested-by: Jiatai He <jiatai2021@iscas.ac.cn>
> > > Signed-off-by: Hongren (Zenithal) Zheng <i@zenithal.me>
> 
> This is missing your SoB Samuel.
> 
> > > ---
> > >  arch/riscv/include/asm/hwcap.h | 11 +++++++++++
> > >  arch/riscv/kernel/cpu.c        | 11 +++++++++++
> > >  arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >  3 files changed, 52 insertions(+)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/arch/riscv/include/asm/hwcap.h b/arch/riscv/include/asm/hwcap.h
> > > index f041bfa7f6a0..b80ca6e77088 100644
> > > --- a/arch/riscv/include/asm/hwcap.h
> > > +++ b/arch/riscv/include/asm/hwcap.h
> > > @@ -53,6 +53,17 @@
> > >  #define RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICSR            40
> > >  #define RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZIFENCEI         41
> > >  #define RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZIHPM            42
> > > +#define RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBC              43
> > > +#define RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBKB             44
> > > +#define RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBKC             45
> > > +#define RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBKX             46
> > > +#define RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZKND             47
> > > +#define RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZKNE             48
> > > +#define RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZKNH             49
> > > +#define RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZKR              50
> > > +#define RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZKSED            51
> > > +#define RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZKSH             52
> > > +#define RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZKT              53
> > >
> > >  #define RISCV_ISA_EXT_MAX              64
> > >  #define RISCV_ISA_EXT_NAME_LEN_MAX     32
> > > diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpu.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpu.c
> > > index a2fc952318e9..10524322a4c0 100644
> > > --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpu.c
> > > +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpu.c
> > > @@ -215,7 +215,18 @@ static struct riscv_isa_ext_data isa_ext_arr[] = {
> > >         __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zihpm, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZIHPM),
> > >         __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zba, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBA),
> > >         __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zbb, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBB),
> > > +       __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zbc, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBC),
> > > +       __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zbkb, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBKB),
> > > +       __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zbkc, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBKC),
> > > +       __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zbkx, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBKX),
> > >         __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zbs, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBS),
> > > +       __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zknd, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZKND),
> > > +       __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zkne, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZKNE),
> > > +       __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zknh, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZKNH),
> > > +       __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zkr, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZKR),
> > > +       __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zksed, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZKSED),
> > > +       __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zksh, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZKSH),
> > > +       __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(zkt, RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZKT),
> > >         __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(smaia, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SMAIA),
> > >         __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(ssaia, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SSAIA),
> > >         __RISCV_ISA_EXT_DATA(sscofpmf, RISCV_ISA_EXT_SSCOFPMF),
> > > diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > > index bdcf460ea53d..447f853a5a4c 100644
> > > --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > > +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c
> > > @@ -309,10 +309,40 @@ void __init riscv_fill_hwcap(void)
> > >                                 SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("svpbmt", RISCV_ISA_EXT_SVPBMT);
> > >                                 SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("zba", RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBA);
> > >                                 SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("zbb", RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBB);
> > > +                               SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("zbc", RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBC);
> > >                                 SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("zbs", RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBS);
> > > +                               SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("zbkb", RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBKB);
> 
> This order does not look correct, please add them in alphanumerical
> order as the comment these SET_ISA_EXT_MAP()s requests. Ditto below.

Agreed. Seems that I did not worked carefully for this part.

> 
> > > +                               SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("zbkc", RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBKC);
> > > +                               SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("zbks", RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBKX);
> > 
> > Should "zbks" be "zbkx"?
> > 
> > >                                 SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("zicbom", RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICBOM);
> > >                                 SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("zicboz", RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZICBOZ);
> > >                                 SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("zihintpause", RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZIHINTPAUSE);
> > > +                               SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("zksed", RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZKSED);
> > > +                               SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("zksh", RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZKSH);
> > > +                               SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("zkr", RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZKR);
> > > +                               SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("zkt", RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZKT);
> > > +                               SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("zkn", RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBKB);
> > > +                               SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("zkn", RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBKC);
> > > +                               SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("zkn", RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBKX);
> > > +                               SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("zkn", RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZKND);
> > > +                               SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("zkn", RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZKNE);
> > > +                               SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("zkn", RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZKNH);
> > > +                               SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("zknd", RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZKND);
> > > +                               SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("zkne", RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZKNE);
> > > +                               SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("zknh", RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZKNH);
> > > +                               SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("zks", RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBKB);
> > > +                               SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("zks", RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBKC);
> > > +                               SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("zks", RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBKX);
> > > +                               SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("zks", RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZKSED);
> > > +                               SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("zks", RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZKSH);
> > > +                               SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("zk", RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBKB);
> > > +                               SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("zk", RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBKC);
> > > +                               SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("zk", RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZBKX);
> > > +                               SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("zk", RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZKND);
> > > +                               SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("zk", RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZKNE);
> > > +                               SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("zk", RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZKNH);
> > > +                               SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("zk", RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZKR);
> > > +                               SET_ISA_EXT_MAP("zk", RISCV_ISA_EXT_ZKT);
> > 
> > It would be nice to consolidate the ones together that search for a
> > single string and set multiple bits, though I don't have any super
> > elegant ideas for how off the top of my head.
> 
> I've got a refactor of this code in progress, dropping all of these
> copy-paste in place of a loop. It certainly looks more elegant than
> this, but it will fall over a bit for these "one string matches many
> extensions" cases. See here:
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-riscv/patch/20230626-thieving-jockstrap-d35d20b535c5@wendy/
> My immediate thought is to add another element to riscv_isa_ext_data,
> that contains "parent" extensions to check for. Should be fairly doable,
> I'll whip something up on top of that...
> 
> Cheers,
> Conor.