Hi Bin, Are you planning to send v2 for this patch or I can modify the text and merge? -- Regards, Atish

Yes. I think it was not reviewed in the past. At least that's what I remember. If I am wrong about that, it's fine. -- Regards, Atish

Atish Patra <Atish.Patra@...> 於 2021年6月5日 週六 上午3:14寫道： Hi Atish, Do you mean to send the patch of PLIC spec on

Στις 2021-06-07 07:03, Anup Patel έγραψε: Totally agree with you, I just thought it'd be a good opportunity to bring this up so that we can discuss it at some point, let's have something

This patch adds SBI performance monitoring unit (PMU) extension which allows S-mode (or VS-mode) software to configure hardware (or firmware) performance counters with help of M-mode (or HS-mode)

Thx Anup, Reviewed-by: Guo Ren <guoren@...> It's Okay for us, I'll follow that. May I write a new version of Linux implementation with the framework, or you've begun preparing that Linux

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