Re: [PATCH v2 1/9] RISC-V: Add AIA related CSR defines

[Conor Dooley]

Hey Anup,

I thought I had already replied here but clearly not, sorry!

On Mon, Jan 09, 2023 at 10:39:08AM +0530, Anup Patel wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 5, 2023 at 4:37 AM Conor Dooley <conor@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 03, 2023 at 07:44:01PM +0530, Anup Patel wrote:

> > > +/* AIA CSR bits */
> > > +#define TOPI_IID_SHIFT               16
> > > +#define TOPI_IID_MASK                0xfff

While I think of it, it'd be worth noting that these are generic across
all of topi, mtopi etc. Initially I thought that this mask was wrong as
the topi section says:
	bits 25:16 Interrupt identity (source number)
	bits 7:0 Interrupt priority

> > > +#define TOPI_IPRIO_MASK              0xff
> > > +#define TOPI_IPRIO_BITS              8
> > > +
> > > +#define TOPEI_ID_SHIFT               16
> > > +#define TOPEI_ID_MASK                0x7ff
> > > +#define TOPEI_PRIO_MASK              0x7ff
> > > +
> > > +#define ISELECT_IPRIO0               0x30
> > > +#define ISELECT_IPRIO15              0x3f
> > > +#define ISELECT_MASK         0x1ff
> > > +
> > > +#define HVICTL_VTI           0x40000000
> > > +#define HVICTL_IID           0x0fff0000
> > > +#define HVICTL_IID_SHIFT     16
> > > +#define HVICTL_IPRIOM                0x00000100
> > > +#define HVICTL_IPRIO         0x000000ff
> >
> > Why not name these as masks, like you did for the other masks?
> > Also, the mask/shift defines appear inconsistent. TOPI_IID_MASK is
> > intended to be used post-shift AFAICT, but HVICTL_IID_SHIFT is intended
> > to be used *pre*-shift.
> > Some consistency in naming and function would be great.
> 
> The following convention is being followed in asm/csr.h for defining
> MASK of any XYZ field in ABC CSR:
> 1. ABC_XYZ : This name is used for MASK which is intended
>    to be used before SHIFT
> 2. ABC_XYZ_MASK: This name is used for MASK which is
>    intended to be used after SHIFT

Which makes sense in theory.

> The existing defines for [M|S]STATUS, HSTATUS, SATP, and xENVCFG
> follows the above convention. The only outlier is HGATPx_VMID_MASK
> define which I will fix in my next KVM RISC-V series.

Yup, it is liable to end up like that.

> I don't see how any of the AIA CSR defines are violating the above
> convention.

What I was advocating for was picking one style and sticking to it.
These copy-paste from docs things are tedious and error prone to review,
and I don't think having multiple styles is helpful.

Tedious as it was, I did check all the numbers though, so in that
respect:
Reviewed-by: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Thanks,
Conor.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature