From: Jeff Law <jeffreyalaw@gmail.com>
To: "Christoph Müllner" <christoph.muellner@vrull.eu>,
binutils@sourceware.org, "Nelson Chu" <nelson@rivosinc.com>,
"Andrew Waterman" <andrew@sifive.com>,
"Palmer Dabbelt" <palmer@dabbelt.com>,
"Jim Wilson" <jim.wilson.gcc@gmail.com>,
"Philipp Tomsich" <philipp.tomsich@vrull.eu>,
"Jan Beulich" <jbeulich@suse.com>,
"Kito Cheng" <kito.cheng@gmail.com>,
"Tsukasa OI" <research_trasio@irq.a4lg.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v5] RISC-V: Add support for the Zfa extension
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2023 09:07:53 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a149e8c0-2a34-16d0-667e-f9bfb699132f@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAEg0e7izvcJ8ZouMOs=QT2T-CTS-8DQcYoqYY-im_-gxTrtqbg@mail.gmail.com>
On 6/29/23 01:52, Christoph Müllner wrote:
> The RISC-V Zfa extension has been frozen.
>
> As this was discussed elsewhere yesterday:
> * Should this patch wait for ratification?
> * Is this blocked by https://github.com/riscv-non-isa/riscv-asm-manual/pull/85 ?
>
> Nelson stated on Apr 12 (response to v4):
> "If there are no new instructions or encodings/formats changed in the
> future spec, then you should commit the patch when the extension is
> ratified."
>
> So my understanding is that this needs to wait for ratification and is
> not blocked by the mentioned PR.
Is there something special about Zfa that makes it desirable to wait for
ratification as opposed to standard practice of gating things as the
specs get to a Frozen state?
jeff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-06-29 15:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-04-13 13:36 Christoph Muellner
2023-06-29 7:52 ` Christoph Müllner
2023-06-29 8:33 ` Christoph Müllner
2023-06-29 15:07 ` Jeff Law [this message]
2023-06-29 15:10 ` Christoph Müllner
2023-06-29 15:37 ` Palmer Dabbelt
2023-06-29 15:49 ` Jeff Law
2023-06-29 15:51 ` Philipp Tomsich
2023-06-30 13:40 ` Jeff Law
2023-06-30 14:06 ` Jeff Law
2023-06-30 14:08 ` Philipp Tomsich
2023-06-30 14:39 ` Jeff Law
2023-06-29 15:52 ` Palmer Dabbelt
2023-06-29 16:03 ` Jeff Law
2023-06-29 16:12 ` Palmer Dabbelt
2023-06-30 14:07 ` Philipp Tomsich
2023-06-30 0:47 ` Nelson Chu
2023-06-30 6:49 ` Kito Cheng
2023-06-30 13:38 ` Jeff Law
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=a149e8c0-2a34-16d0-667e-f9bfb699132f@gmail.com \
--to=jeffreyalaw@gmail.com \
--cc=andrew@sifive.com \
--cc=binutils@sourceware.org \
--cc=christoph.muellner@vrull.eu \
--cc=jbeulich@suse.com \
--cc=jim.wilson.gcc@gmail.com \
--cc=kito.cheng@gmail.com \
--cc=nelson@rivosinc.com \
--cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
--cc=philipp.tomsich@vrull.eu \
--cc=research_trasio@irq.a4lg.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).