From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-sender-0.a4lg.com (mail-sender-0.a4lg.com [IPv6:2401:2500:203:30b:4000:6bfe:4757:0]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DD5853858D28 for ; Wed, 30 Aug 2023 03:59:59 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org DD5853858D28 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=irq.a4lg.com Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=irq.a4lg.com Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail-sender-0.a4lg.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ADB6E300089; Wed, 30 Aug 2023 03:59:56 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=irq.a4lg.com; s=2017s01; t=1693367997; bh=oaUIBdM8BZy+IPmygAAP/9XR38iESVry7BoChqgPpmw=; h=Message-ID:Date:Mime-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=R4UqTjrxRA9vshTbXvlfTixdaSaQOxc/+eAY2wVq2mQ/UiwjJOCj8VwJMCtmX99gP 7E7h9mO6lDIQ84pkkV33VRMQl5JyqnP1U+JfkSA056OAai6PvYPLCMUQ7Nilzmew4T YdfksTQDWWzuIHn8mGJw4uzIqYKMsGY9uNBlNAKc= Message-ID: <91a98bd8-662c-4153-9113-69f67984e1c3@irq.a4lg.com> Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2023 12:59:55 +0900 Mime-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] RISC-V: Make XVentanaCondOps RV64 only Content-Language: en-US To: Greg Favor Cc: Palmer Dabbelt , Andrew Waterman , Jim Wilson , Nelson Chu , Kito Cheng , Jeff Law , binutils@sourceware.org References: From: Tsukasa OI In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org List-Id: On 2023/08/30 12:21, Greg Favor wrote: > On Tue, Aug 29, 2023 at 6:38 PM Tsukasa OI > wrote: > > Unless Ventana is working on some RV32 processors (and soon to be > released > ), I think disabling XVentanaCondOps instructions on RV32 would be safer > (to prevent possible misuses).  I would like to hear thoughts especially > from Ventana employees since I am just a volunteer. > > > Representing Ventana, what you say is correct, i.e. we have no plans to > do RV32 processors. > > Greg Thanks for the official information. Committing. (we could make XVentanaCondOps invalid on RV32 considering your answer but that's for another time.) Tsukasa >   > > I also chose not to reject XVentanaCondOps + RV32 because it is not > stated > that is illegal (unlike Zcf + RV64).  This patch set makes > XVentanaCondOps > + RV32 empty (yet legal). >