2026-10-02T05:22:41-04:00, Guodong Xu <[email protected]>: > On Tue, 29 Sep 2026 15:12:36 +0000, Radim Krcmar wrote: >> Are we sure that B will always be listed in the ISA string when Zba, >> Zbb, and Zbs are present? > > For DT, yes. The binding requires b whenever zba, zbb and zbs are > listed, since commit 0cdb7fc1879b ("dt-bindings: riscv: Add B ISA > extension description"). > > For ACPI there is no such check. But B is a ratified RVI extension > and RVA23U64 lists it as mandatory [1], so any serious hardware vendor > should respect it. Right? > > If the firmware does not advertise B, why should the kernel correct that > for them? This came up in v2 [2], and maybe here I should quote what Conor > said in [3], which I agree with: > > " Part of me wants to know why we should be going to a bunch of effort > to cover up for inaccurate devicetrees etc. Garbage in -> garbage out > and let them keep the pieces."
Great arguments, sorry that I didn't read the older discussions... Reviewed-by: Radim Krčmář <[email protected]>
