Re: [PATCH 1/1] target/riscv: Remove redundant insn length check for zama16b

[LIU Zhiwei]

On 2024/7/31 17:38, Alistair Francis wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 25, 2024 at 11:53 AM LIU Zhiwei
> <zhiwei_liu@linux.alibaba.com> wrote:
> > On 2024/7/23 13:59, Richard Henderson wrote:
> > > On 7/23/24 15:29, LIU Zhiwei wrote:
> > > > The more detailed information about its meaning is in priviledged
> > > > 1.13 specification. More exactly, in 3.6.4. Misaligned Atomicity
> > > > Granule PMA.
> > > >
> > > > The specification said:
> > > >
> > > > "The misaligned atomicity granule PMA applies only to AMOs, loads and
> > > > stores defined in the base
> > > > ISAs, and loads and stores of no more than MXLEN bits defined in the
> > > > F, D, and Q extensions. For an
> > > > instruction in that set, if all accessed bytes lie within the same
> > > > misaligned atomicity granule, the
> > > > instruction will not raise an exception for reasons of address
> > > > alignment, and the instruction will give
> > > > rise to only one memory operation for the purposes of RVWMO—i.e., it
> > > > will execute atomically."
> > > >
> > > > That's the reason why I do not apply zama16b to compressed instructions.
> > > Given the non-specificity of this paragraph, I think not specifically
> > > calling out compressed forms of the base ISA is simply a documentation
> > > error.  In general, the compressed ISA is supposed to be a smaller
> > > encoding of the exact same instruction as the standard ISA.
> > Yes, it's a documentation error. We will fix in the specification.
> >
> > https://github.com/riscv/riscv-isa-manual/pull/1557
> Thanks for getting that clarified
>
> What's the status of a followup patch? We should fix this before the release

I will send the follow patch  as soon as possible.  And resolve another 
comment Richard gives later as it need some work on PBMT(I think).

Thanks,
Zhiwei

> Alistair