4 ms·
Do you have a pointer? There are other things in the 1.9 privileged spec that are messy, but I hope that the next version has relatively large changes. That sa
by bonzini 10y ago
Do you have a pointer?
There are other things in the 1.9 privileged spec that are messy, but I hope that the next version has relatively large changes. That said, the development and discussion style is not very open, and that's a pity (and the justification for not releasing the source of the spec is lame at best).
- asb 10y agohttps://listmaster.pepperfish.net/pipermail/lowrisc-dev-lists.lowrisc.org/2016-August/000545.html https://listmaster.pepperfish.net/pipermail/lowrisc-dev-list... This was cross-posted on RISC-V sw-dev, but Google Groups is failing to load for me right now.
- bonzini 10y agoNice. I don't think the SBI is going to be a problem, it's similar to PowerPC RTAS for example.
- amluto 10y agoDo they want feedback? On a very quick reading, it seems like it would be really nice if synchronous exceptions recorded the faulting opcode. x86 doesn't do this (except sort-of when using VM extensions), and it's annoying).
- rwmj 10y agoThere is an ISA-dev mailing list where this is discussed (unfortunately a Google Group but you can subscribe using an email address): https://groups.google.com/a/groups.riscv.org/forum/#!forum/isa-dev https://groups.google.com/a/groups.riscv.org/forum/#!forum/i... Subscribe links here: https://riscv.org/mailing-lists/ https://riscv.org/mailing-lists/ I'm not involved in the upstream project or ISA dev, but I would definitely welcome having heavyweight kernel developers like yourself contribute, because ultimately it will ensure that the hardware is practical. We're probably 1-2 years away from having lots of RISC-V devkits running Linux, and it'd be nice if they ran Linux really well.