From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-sender-0.a4lg.com (mail-sender-0.a4lg.com [IPv6:2401:2500:203:30b:4000:6bfe:4757:0]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 593313856DE8 for ; Wed, 26 Jul 2023 01:02:28 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org 593313856DE8 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=irq.a4lg.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=irq.a4lg.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail-sender-0.a4lg.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 25977300089; Wed, 26 Jul 2023 01:02:25 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=irq.a4lg.com; s=2017s01; t=1690333345; bh=W6BcF6uoB0eYhxNwzxYympHNaumaAMbUm4z/xi5e8Tw=; h=Message-ID:Date:Mime-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=ZmiClZA1UB8Xr0JHChFzjqF5d+awyA9dwku+OqZdetFdgo9Bo28gNlxRl3WJeN1t1 gWv7G5T9Kd7BBWj4auaoPs4nXX4De7e3kHYE3A1lbBO7Rdb4uFBcEOxI6DYkVfNew6 TMyXdHz4WbE9zNniMYyzp0YSLZLdp398N04oNI3Y= Message-ID: <55dbb1be-45f7-0784-cbd3-c33e43cabbb1@irq.a4lg.com> Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2023 10:02:24 +0900 Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] RISC-V: Add platform property/capability extensions Content-Language: en-US To: Palmer Dabbelt Cc: binutils@sourceware.org References: From: Tsukasa OI In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On 2023/07/26 9:47, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > IMO we want to stay away from these extensions that are just defined by > a single phrase in the spec.  We're still digging out from the first > rounds of changed specs, trying to start supporting stuff that's not > even been defined is going to just make for another round of headaches. I see. I don't completely agree but it makes sense ('Zkt' for example, has a dedicated section to describe this extension). I think there's not so much room for improvements for many of "single phrase" extensions (on 'Ssu64xl', I requested to clarify some details before the ratification; 'Zic64b' describes itself completely and adding more words won't work; definition of 'Zicclsm' on the other hand, might be better to be a bit stricter). However, I see they are not so urgent. As long as this patch set is considered as a prerequisite of further "RISC-V Profiles" support (e.g. "-march=rva..."), I can wait. Thanks, Tsukasa