[PATCH v2 5/5] dt-bindings: riscv: document vector crypto requirements

[Conor Dooley]

On Fri, Jan 17, 2025 at 04:54:52PM -0800, Charlie Jenkins wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 25, 2024 at 05:53:49PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 24, 2024 at 07:42:24PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> > > On Thu, Oct 24, 2024 at 07:24:11PM -0700, Eric Biggers wrote:
> > > > On Thu, Oct 24, 2024 at 01:34:33PM +0100, Conor Dooley wrote:
> > > > > From: Conor Dooley <conor.dooley at microchip.com>
> > > > > 
> > > > > Section 35.2. Extensions Overview of [1] says:
> > > > > | The Zvknhb and Zvbc Vector Crypto Extensions --and accordingly the composite extensions Zvkn and
> > > > > | Zvks-- (sic) require a Zve64x base, or application ("V") base Vector Extension.
> > > > > | All of the other Vector Crypto Extensions can be built on any embedded (Zve*) or application ("V") base
> > > > > | Vector Extension
> > > > > 
> > > > > Apply these rules in the binding, so that invalid combinations can be
> > > > > avoided.
> > > > 
> > > > It looks like that part of the spec is wrong, though.  The Zvknhb and Zvbc are
> > > > correct, but the list of the composite extensions that at least one of them is
> > > > included in is: Zvkn, Zvknc, Zvkng, Zvksc.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > I am attempting to fix this in
> > > https://github.com/riscv/riscv-isa-manual/pull/1697
> > 
> > Looks like at least one person agrees with you, but I'll wait til that's
> > merged before submitting another version. Thanks for reporting it.
> 
> It's been merged now :)

Ye, I actually respun this last week, but opted to wait until after the
merge window to send another revision.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 228 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-riscv/attachments/20250120/b4c8d089/attachment.sig>