4 ms·
Alternatively, you could say that Sifive just wants to retain their investment into cores with the C extension. Or that Krste is so wedded to the idea of "RISC
by jabl 3y ago
Alternatively, you could say that Sifive just wants to retain their investment into cores with the C extension. Or that Krste is so wedded to the idea of "RISC purity + C + fusion" as an alternative to more complex instructions that he invents justifications for it.
In reality, it seems logical to me that all the players here have an interest in the long term health of RISC-V, including applicability to higher end cores. Qualcomm is showing data supporting their position. And Sifive is showing data supporting their position. Will be interesting to see which wins, and whoever it will be it'll hopefully be the best for the long term health of RISC-V even if it means one of the parties needs to partially redesign their cores.
- brucehoult 3y agoIt's entirely possible to have both in the same CPU. At the same time, with a program using any mixture of C extension and Qualcomm's Znew extension that it wants to. The opcodes don't clash. This is an application profile question -- what extensions are required in the CPU in order to run shrink-wrapped software -- not an ISA or hardware question.