Re: [PATCH v2] dt-bindings: riscv: deprecate riscv,isa

2023-07-03 Thread Ben Dooks
On 08/06/2023 17:54, Conor Dooley wrote: From: Conor Dooley intro = When the RISC-V dt-bindings were accepted upstream in Linux, the base ISA etc had yet to be ratified. By the ratification of the base ISA, incompatible changes had snuck into the specifications - for example the Zicsr and

Re: [PATCH v2] dt-bindings: riscv: deprecate riscv,isa

2023-06-22 Thread Palmer Dabbelt
On Thu, 22 Jun 2023 11:59:32 PDT (-0700), Conor Dooley wrote: On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 11:25:35AM -0700, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: Reviewed-by: Palmer Dabbelt Acked-by: Palmer Dabbelt I'm not wed to any particular encoding for the properties, IMO that's more of a decision for the DT folks. IMO

Re: [PATCH v2] dt-bindings: riscv: deprecate riscv,isa

2023-06-22 Thread Conor Dooley
On Thu, Jun 22, 2023 at 11:25:35AM -0700, Palmer Dabbelt wrote: > Reviewed-by: Palmer Dabbelt > Acked-by: Palmer Dabbelt > > I'm not wed to any particular encoding for the properties, IMO that's more > of a decision for the DT folks. IMO the important bit is to just get away > from ISA

Re: [PATCH v2] dt-bindings: riscv: deprecate riscv,isa

2023-06-22 Thread Palmer Dabbelt
On Thu, 08 Jun 2023 09:54:05 PDT (-0700), Conor Dooley wrote: From: Conor Dooley intro = When the RISC-V dt-bindings were accepted upstream in Linux, the base ISA etc had yet to be ratified. By the ratification of the base ISA, incompatible changes had snuck into the specifications - for

Re: [PATCH v2] dt-bindings: riscv: deprecate riscv,isa

2023-06-09 Thread Conor Dooley
On Fri, Jun 09, 2023 at 08:03:44AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote: > Nope, vendor prefixes don't go in node names. That's not explicit > anywhere, but goes against using generic node names. Yeah, that makes sense. > Also, note that looking at the DT spec, there's already prior art here > with PPC.

Re: [PATCH v2] dt-bindings: riscv: deprecate riscv,isa

2023-06-09 Thread Rob Herring
On Thu, Jun 8, 2023 at 12:05 PM Conor Dooley wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 08, 2023 at 11:49:08AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote: > > On Thu, 08 Jun 2023 17:54:05 +0100, Conor Dooley wrote: > > > > As a result of implementing Sean's suggestion, I believe I need to add > > > riscv,isa-extensions as an

Re: [PATCH v2] dt-bindings: riscv: deprecate riscv,isa

2023-06-08 Thread Conor Dooley
On Thu, Jun 08, 2023 at 11:49:08AM -0600, Rob Herring wrote: > On Thu, 08 Jun 2023 17:54:05 +0100, Conor Dooley wrote: > > As a result of implementing Sean's suggestion, I believe I need to add > > riscv,isa-extensions as an exception to the rules preventing vendor > > properties being of object

Re: [PATCH v2] dt-bindings: riscv: deprecate riscv,isa

2023-06-08 Thread Rob Herring
On Thu, 08 Jun 2023 17:54:05 +0100, Conor Dooley wrote: > From: Conor Dooley > > intro > = > > When the RISC-V dt-bindings were accepted upstream in Linux, the base > ISA etc had yet to be ratified. By the ratification of the base ISA, > incompatible changes had snuck into the

[PATCH v2] dt-bindings: riscv: deprecate riscv,isa

2023-06-08 Thread Conor Dooley
From: Conor Dooley intro = When the RISC-V dt-bindings were accepted upstream in Linux, the base ISA etc had yet to be ratified. By the ratification of the base ISA, incompatible changes had snuck into the specifications - for example the Zicsr and Zifencei extensions were spun out of the