[PATCH v3 00/13] RISC-V: assorted fixes and (hopefully) improvements

[Jan Beulich]

Nelson,

On 19.06.2026 13:45, Jan Beulich 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 and v2, and I meanwhile committed a few more
> patches from there, which I assumed were pretty sure to be reasonably
> uncontroversial. For the others I'd prefer RISC-V maintainer approval,
> yet I'm not going to wait indefinitely.
> 
> There aren't many changes in v3. See individual changes for what
> changed, if anything.
> 
> 01: RISC-V: add dedicated vector arithmetic .insn forms
> 02: RISC-V: EEW64 checking
> 03: bfd/RISC-V: Zvfbfwma implies Zvfbfmin
> 04: RISC-V: Zv{b,k}* imply Zve32x
> 05: RISC-V: drop FCVT.Q.L{,U} forms with rounding mode operand
> 06: RISC-V: make FP rounding mode an optional argument
> 07: RISC-V: check operands for Zdinx in RV32
> 08: RISC-V: check operands for Zqinx
> 09: RISC-V/gas: .attribute vs .insn
> 10: RISC-V/gas: warn about non-boolean unaligned-access attribute
> 11: RISC-V/gas: warn about non-power-of-2 stack-align attribute
> 12: RISC-V/bfd: warn about non-boolean unaligned-access attribute
> 13: RISC-V/bfd: warn about non-power-of-2 stack-align attribute

now that you're back, would you mind looking over this series. After
branching for 2.47 I'd like to get this in, as I think I have already
waited for rather too long.

Thanks, Jan

> 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