Re: [PATCH -next V8 00/14] riscv: Add GENERIC_ENTRY support and related features

[Björn Töpel]

Guo Ren <guoren@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On Mon, Dec 5, 2022 at 5:46 PM Björn Töpel <bjorn@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> guoren@xxxxxxxxxx writes:
>>
>> > From: Guo Ren <guoren@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> >
>> > The patches convert riscv to use the generic entry infrastructure from
>> > kernel/entry/*. Additionally, add independent irq stacks (IRQ_STACKS)
>> > for percpu to prevent kernel stack overflows. Add generic_entry based
>> > STACKLEAK support. Some optimization for entry.S with new .macro and
>> > merge ret_from_kernel_thread into ret_from_fork.
>> >
>> > We have tested it with rv64, rv32, rv64 + 32rootfs, all are passed.
>> >
>> > You can directly try it with:
>> > [1] https://github.com/guoren83/linux/tree/generic_entry_v8
>>
>> Guo, this is a really nice work, and I'm looking forward having generic
>> entry support for RV. However, there are many patches in this series
>> that really shouldn't be part of the series.
>>
>> Patch 2, 3, 4, and 10 should defintely be pulled out.
> Okay.
>
>>
>> I'm not sure 7, 8, and 9 belong to series, as it's really a separate
>> feature.
> The separate irq/softirq stack patches dpend on generic_entry tightly,
> so I recommand put them together.

I'd say *depends* on the series, not required for generic entry. Again,
keeping the series orthogonal and small is a good thing.

>> For GENERIC_ENTRY support only patch 1, 5, 6, 12, 13, and 14, really
>> required. The others are unrelated.
> Thx for the reminder; I will re-organize them.

This is a really nice clean up, and the reason I'm pushing for removing
unrelated patches in the series, is because I want to see it land in the
RV tree sooner, rather than later. Send these as follow-ups to generic
entry, once it lands in the tree.


Thank you for the hard work!
Björn