Re: [RFC PATCH v2 03/15] s390x/cpumodel: add msa12 changes

[Janosch Frank <frankja@linux.ibm.com>]

On 12/9/24 4:54 PM, Hendrik Brueckner wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 09, 2024 at 04:45:25PM +0100, Janosch Frank wrote:
>> On 12/9/24 4:24 PM, Hendrik Brueckner wrote:
>>> On Mon, Dec 09, 2024 at 03:48:11PM +0100, Janosch Frank wrote:
>>>> On 12/6/24 1:27 PM, Hendrik Brueckner wrote:
>>>>> MSA12 changes the KIMD/KLMD instruction format for SHA3/SHAKE.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Hendrik Brueckner <brueckner@linux.ibm.com>
>>>>> Reviewed-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@linux.ibm.com>
>>>>
>>>> MSA6 is a prereq, no?
>>>
>>> MSA6 is the prereq. However, there is no explicit feature definition
>>> for the MSA_EXT_6 due to no STFLE and subfunctions only.  The only
>>> way would be to pick one or more / all MSA6 subfunctions for which
>>> there is a feature defined...
>>
>> Which you did for MSA11, no?
> 
> The other way around.
> 
> Here: MSA_EXT_12 would check/have a dependency on all(?) subfuncs
> introduced with MSA_EXT_6.
> 
>>
>> I'm not saying that subfunc handling is great :)
> 
> Let me have a look which functions come with MSA_6 related to KIMD/KLMD.
> 
> Would it be OK to have those checks as a separate patch so that cpu
> model in general is not blocked?

Of course, I mostly want this question being answered in general.