Re: [PATCH v4 00/12] RISC-V: assorted fixes and (hopefully) improvements

Sorry for the late reply.  Thanks Jan for doing these, and thank you
also for your patience in allowing the RISC-V maintainers to at least
take a look at these changes.  Thanks Jaiwei also for helping review
these patches.  I have shared some background information and thoughts
in the individual patches; this does not affect these v4 patches, so
please commit if you think it's time ;)

Thanks again
Nelson

On Fri, Jul 24, 2026 at 5:59 PM Jan Beulich <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> There may not be many dependencies among the patches, but the issues
> were all noticed more or less together (i.e. while addressing one,
> the next one popped up). I've not made an attempt at sorting the V vs
> Z?inx issue, as per Andrew's request.
>
> Quite a few further points are made in remarks in individual patches.
> Input there is very welcome.
>
> Jiawei kindly reviewed v1 ... v3, and I meanwhile committed a few more
> patches from there (after getting feedback from Nelson). For the others
> I'd prefer RISC-V maintainer approval, yet I'm not going to wait
> indefinitely.
>
> There are in particular a few new patches in v4. See individual changes
> for what changed, if anything.
>
> 01: RISC-V: Zv{b,k}* imply Zve32x
> 02: RISC-V: Zve{32,64}f don't need to explicitly imply Zvl{32,64}b
> 03: RISC-V: replace INSN_V_EEW64
> 04: RISC-V: drop FCVT.Q.L{,U} forms with rounding mode operand
> 05: RISC-V: make FP rounding mode an optional argument
> 06: RISC-V: check operands for Zdinx in RV32
> 07: RISC-V: check operands for Zqinx
> 08: RISC-V/gas: .attribute vs .insn
> 09: RISC-V/gas: warn about non-boolean unaligned-access attribute
> 10: RISC-V/gas: warn about non-power-of-2 stack-align attribute
> 11: RISC-V/bfd: warn about non-boolean unaligned-access attribute
> 12: RISC-V/bfd: warn about non-power-of-2 stack-align attribute
>
> I'd also like to point out that [1] continues to be pending. I'm far
> from insisting that that patch be taken, but something needs doing
> about the issue.
>
> Jan
>
> [1] https://sourceware.org/pipermail/binutils/2023-March/126601.html