[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b031cfb7-6a50-cc01-3b8c-5e75d01b4a43@sholland.org>
Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2022 08:40:30 -0500
From: Samuel Holland <samuel@...lland.org>
To: Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>
Cc: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@...renesas.com>,
Prabhakar <prabhakar.csengg@...il.com>,
Sagar Kadam <sagar.kadam@...ive.com>,
Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org, Guo Ren <guoren@...nel.org>,
Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Biju Das <biju.das.jz@...renesas.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
Krzysztof Kozlowski <krzysztof.kozlowski+dt@...aro.org>,
Rob Herring <robh+dt@...nel.org>, devicetree@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] irqchip/sifive-plic: Name the chip more
generically
On 6/27/22 2:11 AM, Marc Zyngier wrote:
> On 2022-06-27 06:12, Samuel Holland wrote:
>> The interface for SiFive's PLIC was adopted and clarified by RISC-V as
>> the standard PLIC interface. Now that several PLIC implementations by
>> different vendors share this same interface, it is somewhat misleading
>> to report "SiFive PLIC" to userspace, when no SiFive hardware may be
>> present. This is especially the case when some implementations are
>> subtly incompatible with the binding and behavior of the SiFive PLIC,
>> yet are similar enough to share a driver.
>
> Too late. This is ABI, and not changing, exactly because userspace
> sees it.
That makes sense. I will drop this patch.
Regards,
Samuel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists