linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] dt-bindings: riscv: document cbom-block-size

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

Message-ID: <20220518002529.GA1928329-robh@kernel.org>
Date:   Tue, 17 May 2022 19:25:29 -0500
From:   Rob Herring <robh@...nel.org>
To:     Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>
Cc:     palmer@...belt.com, paul.walmsley@...ive.com,
        linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        wefu@...hat.com, guoren@...nel.org, atishp@...shpatra.org,
        anup@...infault.org, mick@....forth.gr, samuel@...lland.org,
        cmuellner@...ux.com, philipp.tomsich@...ll.eu, krzk+dt@...nel.org,
        devicetree@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] dt-bindings: riscv: document cbom-block-size

On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 11:41:30PM +0200, Heiko Stuebner wrote:
> The Zicbom operates on a block-size defined for the cpu-core,
> which does not necessarily match other cache-sizes used.
> 
> So add the necessary property for the system to know the core's
> block-size.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Heiko Stuebner <heiko@...ech.de>
> ---
>  Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/cpus.yaml | 7 +++++++
>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
> 
> diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/cpus.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/cpus.yaml
> index d632ac76532e..b179bfd155a3 100644
> --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/cpus.yaml
> +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/cpus.yaml
> @@ -63,6 +63,13 @@ properties:
>        - riscv,sv48
>        - riscv,none
>  
> +  riscv,cbom-block-size:
> +    $ref: /schemas/types.yaml#/definitions/uint32

Any value 0-2^32 is valid? 

> +    description:
> +      Blocksize in bytes for the Zicbom cache operations. The block
> +      size is a property of the core itself and does not necessarily
> +      match other software defined cache sizes.

What about hardware defined cache sizes? I'm scratching my head as to 
what a 'software defined cache size' is.

> +
>    riscv,isa:
>      description:
>        Identifies the specific RISC-V instruction set architecture
> -- 
> 2.35.1
> 
>