Στις 2021-06-04 23:01, Atish Patra έγραψε: M-mode can share a code region with S-mode using PMP/ePMP and let S-mode map that region as executable on its address space. With the current PMP

Agreed. The firmware code will still be executed while the priv mode is S-mode right ? Wouldn't that violate the priv spec ? That's what I am thinking. The only additional cost is just a

Reviewed-by: Atish Patra <atish.patra@...> -- Regards, Atish

Reviewed-by: Atish Patra <atish.patra@...> -- Regards, Atish

IIRC, PLIC spec was never reviewed widely. As this group is more active now, tt would be good to send it as a separate patch so we can do a detailed review of that as well. I am just concerned about

This one is more verbose but sounds better to me. May be we should just explicitly say that "all functions belonging to that extension must be implemented" similar to the below version. --

%s/a SBI/an SBI/ %s/A SBI/An SBI/ Signed-off-by: Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@...> --- riscv-sbi.adoc | 12 ++++++------ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/riscv-sbi.adoc

Hi Heinrich, Sure. Will send a new patch to fix other places in the same file. How about: If sbi_probe_extension() signals that an extension is available, all functions that conform to the SBI

a %s/a SBI/an SBI/ (as you will pronounce SBI as as-bee-aye) Can we do away with all the placeholders? How about: "SBI extensions as whole are optional but they shall not be partially implemented:

Signed-off-by: Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@...> --- riscv-sbi.adoc | 6 ++++++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) diff --git a/riscv-sbi.adoc b/riscv-sbi.adoc index 11c30c3..8696f97 100644 ---

I can send a patch. I know probe() can be helpful. I just don't see the value of using version number to determine whether a certain SBI extension is avaiable. Regards, Bin

Στις 2021-06-03 18:13, Anup Patel έγραψε: Thanks for working on this, it seems simple and clean, some thoughts: a) I also prefer DMAS or something with DMA in the name, and fixed-sized

If CPU is successfully suspended, then the function is implemented by SBI firmware. I don't see why I need to care about the version number. If suspend function is not available, then

Any function not supported, OS can make the SBI call, and check its return value against SBI_ERR_NOT_SUPPORTED. I don't believe an arbitrary version number really helps here. Like you said, SRST

Do we have policies, or planning/schedule of versions? What is the version supposed to be used for? Regards, Bin

Reviewed-by: Bin Meng <bmeng.cn@...>