On Tue, 27 Dec 2022 09:35:55 PST (-0800), gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org wrote:
On 12/21/22 11:31, Christoph Muellner wrote:
From: Christoph Müllner <christoph.muell...@vrull.eu>
This series adds basic support for the vector crypto extensions:
* Zvkb
* Zvkg
* Zvkh[a,b]
* Zvkn
* Zvksed
* Zvksh
The implementation follows the version 20221220 of the specification,
which can be found here:
https://github.com/riscv/riscv-crypto/releases/tag/v20221220
Note, that this specification is not frozen yet, meaning that
incompatible changes are possible.
Therefore, this patchset is marked as RFC and should not be considered
for upstream inclusion.
All extensions come with (passing) tests for the feature test macros.
A Binutils patch series for vector crypto support can be found here:
https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/2022-December/125272.html
Signed-off-by: Christoph Müllner <christoph.muell...@vrull.eu>
---
gcc/common/config/riscv/riscv-common.cc | 16 ++++++++++++++++
gcc/config/riscv/riscv-opts.h | 16 ++++++++++++++++
gcc/config/riscv/riscv.opt | 3 +++
gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/zvkb.c | 13 +++++++++++++
gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/zvkg.c | 13 +++++++++++++
gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/zvkha.c | 13 +++++++++++++
gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/zvkhb.c | 13 +++++++++++++
gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/zvkn.c | 13 +++++++++++++
gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/zvksed.c | 13 +++++++++++++
gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/zvksh.c | 13 +++++++++++++
10 files changed, 126 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/zvkb.c
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/zvkg.c
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/zvkha.c
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/zvkhb.c
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/zvkn.c
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/zvksed.c
create mode 100644 gcc/testsuite/gcc.target/riscv/zvksh.c
I don't see anything objectionable in here. I'd guess that most (but
perhaps not all) of these will wire up as builtins at some point in the
not too distant future.
These allow things like `-march=rv64gc_zvksh`, it's not really clear
what the indented behavior is there -- specifically, does that
implicitly enable some base vector extension?
I've just skimmed the ISA manual here, but all I can find is a bit
ambiguous
With the exception of Zvknhb, each of these Vector Crypto Extensions
can be build on any base Vector Extension, embedded (Zve*) or
application ("V"). Zvknhb requires ELEN=64 and therefore cannot be
implemented on a Zve32* base.
I doubt it really matters which way we pick, but it is something we're
going to need to keep consistent moving forwards as otherwise users
might get some surprising behavior. This has come up a bunch of times,
but there's slightly different wording each time in the specs and I'm
never really sure what to read of it.
I don't think that alone would be enough to delay this for gcc-14, but
as far as I can tell binutils is branching very soon for a target
release in the middle of January. I'm guessing these extensions will
not be frozen by then, which would be a blocker.
I'm not sure if anyone has a pressing need for these? If not, I think
it's best to delay them until binutils-2.41 (and presumably then
gcc-14).
