Re: [PATCH RFC 08/10] riscv: dts: Add initial Anlogic DR1V90 SoC device tree

From: Conor Dooley
Date: Tue Jul 22 2025 - 11:22:37 EST


On Mon, Jul 21, 2025 at 11:46:14PM +0800, Junhui Liu wrote:
> + cpus {
> + #address-cells = <1>;
> + #size-cells = <0>;
> + timebase-frequency = <800000000>;
> +
> + cpu@0 {
> + compatible = "nuclei,ux900", "riscv";
> + device_type = "cpu";
> + reg = <0>;
> + riscv,isa = "rv64imafdc";
> + riscv,isa-base = "rv64i";
> + riscv,isa-extensions = "i", "m", "a", "f", "d", "c", "zba", "zbb", "zbc",
> + "zbkc", "zbs", "zicntr", "zicsr", "zifencei",
> + "zihintpause", "zihpm";

Why do riscv,isa and riscv,isa-extensions differ?
If riscv,isa is not even accurate, why not just remove it entirely?

> + i-cache-block-size = <64>;
> + i-cache-size = <32768>;
> + i-cache-sets = <256>;
> + d-cache-block-size = <64>;
> + d-cache-size = <32768>;
> + d-cache-sets = <256>;
> + mmu-type = "riscv,sv39";
> +
> + cpu0_intc: interrupt-controller {
> + compatible = "riscv,cpu-intc";
> + interrupt-controller;
> + #interrupt-cells = <1>;
> + };
> + };
> + };

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature