From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: hch@infradead.org (Christoph Hellwig) Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2018 22:56:49 -0800 Subject: [RFC 0/2] RISC-V: A proposal to add vendor-specific code In-Reply-To: References: <1540982130-28248-1-git-send-email-vincentc@andestech.com> Message-ID: <20181106065649.GA13526@infradead.org> To: linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-riscv.lists.infradead.org On Mon, Nov 05, 2018 at 09:39:29PM +0200, Nick Kossifidis wrote: > a) By directly modifying your custom CSRs, it means that we will need > compiler support in order to compile a kernel with your code in it. This > will break CI systems and will introduce various issues on testing and > reviewing your code. In general if we need custom toolchains to compile > the kernel, that may be unavailable (vendors will not always open source > their compiler support), we won't be able to maintain a decent level of > code quality in the tree. How can the maintainer push your code on the > repository if he/she can't even perform a basic compilation test ? And that (besides avoiding the wild growth of extensions) is the major reason why accepting vendor specific CSRs or instructions is a no-go. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FD84C32789 for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2018 06:56:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org (bombadil.infradead.org [198.137.202.133]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5608320827 for ; Tue, 6 Nov 2018 06:56:54 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=lists.infradead.org header.i=@lists.infradead.org header.b="LmdGEwFy" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 5608320827 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=infradead.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux-riscv-bounces+infradead-linux-riscv=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=lists.infradead.org; s=bombadil.20170209; h=Sender: Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:Cc:List-Subscribe:List-Help:List-Post: List-Archive:List-Unsubscribe:List-Id:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:References: Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date:Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description: Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID: List-Owner; bh=6/lgRkwDDdQJYbfhhteirYP6rMWLjXdLSU4DbRecWsc=; b=LmdGEwFyj32keS eCBGDsjzsGQWBJevvrbhBzKc+B7LvpfVvCyyJjWvEo/cLuuhpOiwz4pqy63g8usF6BeNO/YRvZqGA 0KRCzRJEX1dfuRVvOrzM0pBdYhirMBwtG8ivf67iyQdsW4GeT99S7lVRedaHSr/wczbu2zEIpnwct B9lSBrU0L27gfX4QCzJvJm3M4zMCIi/PwwgfpJIQPqZj3zba+RKy5icG5WpTs0SuPk3aRqBqEIv+s jTZQI5HZ4jzBZlB9Hou+WOu3Jl58inXac5+tCZ2EGYWRsGRz2or7RHvM+th1QD3MbuLcc4E71cpSh Sg8VbTrF006HT0MZuqCg==; Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=bombadil.infradead.org) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1gJvID-0004nq-3J; Tue, 06 Nov 2018 06:56:53 +0000 Received: from hch by bombadil.infradead.org with local (Exim 4.90_1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1gJvI9-0004nh-QB; Tue, 06 Nov 2018 06:56:49 +0000 Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2018 22:56:49 -0800 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Nick Kossifidis Subject: Re: [RFC 0/2] RISC-V: A proposal to add vendor-specific code Message-ID: <20181106065649.GA13526@infradead.org> References: <1540982130-28248-1-git-send-email-vincentc@andestech.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15) X-BeenThere: linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: zong@andestech.com, aou@eecs.berkeley.edu, arnd@arndb.de, alankao@andestech.com, greentime@andestech.com, palmer@sifive.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Vincent Chen , linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, deanbo422@gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "linux-riscv" Errors-To: linux-riscv-bounces+infradead-linux-riscv=archiver.kernel.org@lists.infradead.org Message-ID: <20181106065649.DSQS4MdRPGGq0fTxEpLshMlUkDIXkWJ8jZfb8vDAygs@z> On Mon, Nov 05, 2018 at 09:39:29PM +0200, Nick Kossifidis wrote: > a) By directly modifying your custom CSRs, it means that we will need > compiler support in order to compile a kernel with your code in it. This > will break CI systems and will introduce various issues on testing and > reviewing your code. In general if we need custom toolchains to compile > the kernel, that may be unavailable (vendors will not always open source > their compiler support), we won't be able to maintain a decent level of > code quality in the tree. How can the maintainer push your code on the > repository if he/she can't even perform a basic compilation test ? And that (besides avoiding the wild growth of extensions) is the major reason why accepting vendor specific CSRs or instructions is a no-go. _______________________________________________ linux-riscv mailing list linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv