On 23.01.2023 12:50, Andrew Cooper wrote: > On 20/01/2023 2:59 pm, Oleksii Kurochko wrote: >> + csrr t0, CSR_SEPC >> + REG_S t0, RISCV_CPU_USER_REGS_OFFSET(sepc)(sp) >> + csrr t0, CSR_SSTATUS >> + REG_S t0, RISCV_CPU_USER_REGS_OFFSET(sstatus)(sp) > > So something I've noticed about CSRs through this series. > > The C CSR macros are set up to use real CSR names, but the CSR_* > constants used in C and ASM are raw numbers. > > If we're using raw numbers, then the C CSR accessors should be static > inlines instead, but the advantage of using names is the toolchain can > issue an error when we reference a CSR not supported by the current > extensions.
That's a default-off diagnostic iirc, so we'd gain something here only when explicitly turning that on as well. Jan
