Re: [PATCH v4 02/11] riscv: add ISA extensions validation

[Conor Dooley]

On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 01:58:11PM +0200, Clément Léger wrote:
> Yeah, see what you mean. I think we also need to define if we want to
> expose all the ISA extensions in /proc/cpuinfo (ie no matter the config
> of the kernel) or not. If so, additional validate() callback would make
> sense. If we want to keep the full ISA string in /proc/info, then we
> will need another way of doing so.

If extensions aren't usable, they shouldn't be in /proc/cpuinfo either
as there's programs that parse that to figure out what they can use,
possibly even only checking a single cpu and using that as gospel.
That's why there's that per-hart-isa thing that was added by one of your
colleagues last year.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature