linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] dt-bindings: riscv: enum for riscv,isa

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <mhng-cec1febb-7da2-4d6e-9c38-3b1580b75e19@palmerdabbelt-glaptop>
Date:   Thu, 22 Apr 2021 20:32:44 -0700 (PDT)
From:   Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>
To:     xypron.glpk@....de
CC:     robh+dt@...nel.org, Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
        aou@...s.berkeley.edu, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject:     Re: [RFC] dt-bindings: riscv: enum for riscv,isa

On Tue, 06 Apr 2021 12:05:34 PDT (-0700), xypron.glpk@....de wrote:
> In Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/cpus.yaml I find for riscv,isa:
>
>      enum:
>        - rv64imac
>        - rv64imafdc
>
> This implies that 'rv64imafc' or 'rv64imafdqc' would be illegal values
> while these combinations of extensions would be compliant with "The
> RISC-V Instruction Set Manual".
>
> To me it does not make much sense to try to enumerate all permissible
> permutations of RISC-V extensions.
>
> Shouldn't this enum be removed and replaced by examples?

I'm generally OK with that, but I'm not sure how to do it: won't we fail 
the scheme checks if we don't have something defined for "riscv,isa"?