linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] riscv: Separate vendor extensions from standard extensions

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]

Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2024 10:37:19 -0700
From: Charlie Jenkins <charlie@...osinc.com>
To: Conor Dooley <conor@...nel.org>
Cc: Paul Walmsley <paul.walmsley@...ive.com>,
	Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@...belt.com>,
	Albert Ou <aou@...s.berkeley.edu>,
	Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@...rochip.com>,
	Evan Green <evan@...osinc.com>, Andy Chiu <andy.chiu@...ive.com>,
	linux-riscv@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] riscv: Separate vendor extensions from standard
 extensions

On Thu, Jun 13, 2024 at 03:45:33PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 09, 2024 at 09:34:13PM -0700, Charlie Jenkins wrote:
> > All extensions, both standard and vendor, live in one struct
> > "riscv_isa_ext". There is currently one vendor extension, xandespmu, but
> > it is likely that more vendor extensions will be added to the kernel in
> > the future. As more vendor extensions (and standard extensions) are
> > added, riscv_isa_ext will become more bloated with a mix of vendor and
> > standard extensions.
> > 
> > This also allows each vendor to be conditionally enabled through
> > Kconfig.
> > 
> > ---
> > This has been split out from the previous series that contained the
> > addition of xtheadvector due to lack of reviews. The xtheadvector
> > support will be posted again separately from this.
> 
> I think that's a good call.
> 
> > The reviewed-bys on "riscv: Extend cpufeature.c to detect vendor extensions"
> > and "riscv: Introduce vendor variants of extension helpers" have been
> > dropped in this series. The majority of the code is the same in these
> > patches, but thead-specific code is swapped out with andes-specific
> > code. The changes are minimal, but I decided to drop the reviews in case
> > I inadvertently introduced issues.
> 
> Actually, you only completely did that on the first of the two patches
> you mention, but I don't mind.

You reviewed the third patch of this series in the first revision of
this series and I should have updated this comment.

- Charlie