From: Palmer Dabbelt <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: Atish Patra <Atish.Patra@wdc.com>
Cc: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org,
email@example.com, Atish Patra <Atish.Patra@wdc.com>,
Paul Walmsley <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/4] Add support for SBI v0.2
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2019 10:56:28 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <mhng-fc56738d-7643-4125-b6f7-486afb948a53@palmerdabbelt-glaptop> (raw)
On Tue, 26 Nov 2019 11:04:59 PST (-0800), Atish Patra wrote:
> The Supervisor Binary Interface(SBI) specification now defines a
> base extension that provides extendability to add future extensions
> while maintaining backward compatibility with previous versions.
> The new version is defined as 0.2 and older version is marked as 0.1.
> This series adds support v0.2 and a unified calling convention
> implementation between 0.1 and 0.2. It also add other SBI v0.2
> functionality defined in . The base support for SBI v0.2 is already
> available in OpenSBI v0.5. This series needs additional patches in
> Tested on both BBL, OpenSBI with/without the above patch series.
>  https://github.com/riscv/riscv-sbi-doc/blob/master/riscv-sbi.adoc
>  https://github.com/riscv/riscv-sbi-doc/pull/27
>  http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/opensbi/2019-November/000738.html
> Changes from v4->v5
> 1. Fixed few minor comments related to static & inline.
> 2. Make sure that every patch is boot tested individually.
> Changes from v3->v4.
> 1. Rebased on top of for-next.
> 2. Fixed issuses with checkpatch --strict.
> 3. Unfied all IPI/fence related functions.
> 4. Added Hfence related SBI calls.
> 5. Moved to function pointer based boot time switch between v01 and v02 calls.
> Changes from v2->v3.
> 1. Moved v0.1 extensions to a new config.
> 2. Added support for relacement extensions of v0.1 extensions.
> Changes from v1->v2
> 1. Removed the legacy calling convention.
> 2. Moved all SBI related calls to sbi.c.
> 3. Moved all SBI related macros to uapi.
> Atish Patra (4):
> RISC-V: Mark existing SBI as 0.1 SBI.
> RISC-V: Add basic support for SBI v0.2
> RISC-V: Introduce a new config for SBI v0.1
> RISC-V: Implement new SBI v0.2 extensions
> arch/riscv/Kconfig | 6 +
> arch/riscv/include/asm/sbi.h | 177 +++++++-----
> arch/riscv/kernel/Makefile | 1 +
> arch/riscv/kernel/sbi.c | 547 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> arch/riscv/kernel/setup.c | 2 +
> 5 files changed, 660 insertions(+), 73 deletions(-)
There's a few issues with the implementation, but I think the bigger question
is what do to with the spec. The SBI stuff sort of snuck in to Linux without
actually having a proper spec written down, so I'm happy to just say "let's
take the 0.2 stuff as soon as it's frozen" as we're at least in a better spot
than with the legacy stuff. Nominally we'd need to wait for a ratified
specification here, which probably means a 1.0 specification, but that's a way
off and I don't want to just sit around on the legacy stuff.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-12-04 18:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-11-26 19:04 [PATCH v5 0/4] Add support for SBI v0.2 Atish Patra
2019-11-26 19:05 ` [PATCH v5 1/4] RISC-V: Mark existing SBI as 0.1 SBI Atish Patra
2019-12-02 23:59 ` Palmer Dabbelt
2019-11-26 19:05 ` [PATCH v5 2/4] RISC-V: Add basic support for SBI v0.2 Atish Patra
2019-12-03 21:17 ` Palmer Dabbelt
2019-11-26 19:05 ` [PATCH v5 3/4] RISC-V: Introduce a new config for SBI v0.1 Atish Patra
2019-12-04 18:52 ` Palmer Dabbelt
2019-12-04 22:03 ` Atish Patra
2019-11-26 19:05 ` [PATCH v5 4/4] RISC-V: Implement new SBI v0.2 extensions Atish Patra
2019-11-29 4:51 ` Anup Patel
2019-11-29 4:57 ` Anup Patel
2019-12-04 21:10 ` Atish Patra
2019-12-04 18:52 ` Palmer Dabbelt
2019-12-04 22:04 ` Atish Patra
2019-12-04 18:56 ` Palmer Dabbelt [this message]
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).