On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 02:41:05PM -0500, Rob Herring wrote:
On Wed, Apr 10, 2024 at 02:37:21PM -0700, Deepak Gupta wrote:
On Wed, Apr 10, 2024 at 4:58 AM Rob Herring robh@kernel.org wrote:
On Wed, Apr 03, 2024 at 04:34:52PM -0700, Deepak Gupta wrote:
Make an entry for cfi extensions in extensions.yaml.
Signed-off-by: Deepak Gupta debug@rivosinc.com
.../devicetree/bindings/riscv/extensions.yaml | 10 ++++++++++ 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+)
diff --git a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/extensions.yaml b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/extensions.yaml index 63d81dc895e5..45b87ad6cc1c 100644 --- a/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/extensions.yaml +++ b/Documentation/devicetree/bindings/riscv/extensions.yaml @@ -317,6 +317,16 @@ properties: The standard Zicboz extension for cache-block zeroing as ratified in commit 3dd606f ("Create cmobase-v1.0.pdf") of riscv-CMOs.
- const: zicfilpdescription:The standard Zicfilp extension for enforcing forward edge control-flowintegrity in commit 3a20dc9 of riscv-cfi and is in public review.Does in public review mean the commit sha is going to change?
Less likely. Next step after public review is to gather comments from public review. If something is really pressing and needs to be addressed, then yes this will change. Else this gets ratified as it is.
If the commit sha can change, then it is useless. What's the guarantee someone is going to remember to update it if it changes?
Sorry for late reply.
I was following existing wordings and patterns for messaging in this file. You would rather have me remove sha and only mention that spec is in public review?
Rob