[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZM00yFKcDczO50lJ@ghost>
Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2023 10:26:32 -0700
From: Charlie Jenkins <charlie@...osinc.com>
To: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>
Cc: linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, kvm-riscv@...ts.infradead.org,
bpf@...r.kernel.org, Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...nel.org>,
Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ard Biesheuvel <ardb@...nel.org>,
Anup Patel <anup@...infault.org>,
Atish Patra <atishp@...shpatra.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>,
Song Liu <song@...nel.org>, Yonghong Song <yhs@...com>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>,
Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>,
Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
Björn Töpel <bjorn@...nel.org>,
Luke Nelson <luke.r.nels@...il.com>,
Xi Wang <xi.wang@...il.com>, Nam Cao <namcaov@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/10] RISC-V: Expand instruction definitions
On Fri, Aug 04, 2023 at 08:59:24AM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 03, 2023 at 07:10:26PM -0700, Charlie Jenkins wrote:
> > There are many systems across the kernel that rely on directly creating
> > and modifying instructions. In order to unify them, create shared
> > definitions for instructions and registers.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Charlie Jenkins <charlie@...osinc.com>
> > ---
> > arch/riscv/include/asm/insn.h | 2742 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
>
> "I did a lot of copy-pasting from the RISC-V spec"
>
> How is anyone supposed to cross check this when there's 1000s of lines
> of a diff here? We've had some subtle bugs in some of the definitions in
> the past, so I would like to be able to check at this opportune moment
> that things are correct.
>
> > arch/riscv/include/asm/reg.h | 88 +
> > arch/riscv/kernel/kgdb.c | 4 +-
> > arch/riscv/kernel/probes/simulate-insn.c | 39 +-
> > arch/riscv/kernel/vector.c | 2 +-
>
> You need to at least split this up. I doubt a 2742 change diff for
> insn.h was required to make the changes in these 4 files.
Yeah it is kind of a nightmare to look at, I will split it up.
>
> Then after that, it would be so much easier to reason about these
> changes if the additions to insn.h happened at the same time as the
> removals from the affected locations.
>
> I would probably split this so that things are done in more stages,
> with the larger patches split between changes that require no new
> definitions and changes that require moving things to insn.h
>
> > 5 files changed, 2629 insertions(+), 246 deletions(-)
>
> What you would want to see if this arrived in your inbox as a reviewer?
>
> Don't get me wrong, I do like what you are doing here, the BPF JIT
> especially is filled with "uhh okay, I guess those offsets are right",
> so I don't mean to be discouraging.
>
> Thanks,
> Conor.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists