On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 11:13:40AM -0400, Charlie Jenkins wrote:
On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 03:51:54PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
On Wed, Apr 24, 2024 at 04:22:02PM +0200, Alexandre Ghiti wrote:
Hi Charlie,
On 21/04/2024 03:04, Charlie Jenkins wrote:
This loop is supposed to check if ext->subset_ext_ids[j] is valid, rather than if ext->subset_ext_ids[i] is valid, before setting the extension id ext->subset_ext_ids[j] in isainfo->isa.
Signed-off-by: Charlie Jenkins charlie@rivosinc.com Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley conor.dooley@microchip.com Fixes: 0d8295ed975b ("riscv: add ISA extension parsing for scalar crypto")
arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c index 48874aac4871..b537731cadef 100644 --- a/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c +++ b/arch/riscv/kernel/cpufeature.c @@ -609,7 +609,7 @@ static int __init riscv_fill_hwcap_from_ext_list(unsigned long *isa2hwcap) if (ext->subset_ext_size) { for (int j = 0; j < ext->subset_ext_size; j++) {
if (riscv_isa_extension_check(ext->subset_ext_ids[i]))
if (riscv_isa_extension_check(ext->subset_ext_ids[j])) set_bit(ext->subset_ext_ids[j], isainfo->isa); } }I think this should go into -fixes, let's check with Palmer if he wants to take this patch only or if you should send the patch on its own.
I think splitting out this and patch 1 into a new series targeting fixes would probably make things clearer?
Okay I can do that. I will give it a bit more time before I send this series split into two to allow time for the rest of the patches to gather comments so I avoid sending too many duplicate patches.
Ye, I do hope to get back to this series later in the week when I have time to actually read through all of the patches in detail.
However, you wouldn't have to resend both parts of the series - you can just split out the fixes portion and send that, leaving the rest of the series sitting on the list to gather comments.