On Tue, 28 Sep 2021 16:23:56 PDT (-0700), ati...@atishpatra.org wrote:
On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 3:43 PM Palmer Dabbelt <pal...@dabbelt.com> wrote:
On Tue, 28 Sep 2021 13:05:53 PDT (-0700), ati...@atishpatra.org wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2021 at 11:34 AM Palmer Dabbelt <pal...@dabbelt.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, 27 Sep 2021 08:57:15 PDT (-0700), markhimelst...@riscv.org wrote:
>> > the words in this document :
>> >
>> >
https://wiki.riscv.org/plugins/servlet/mobile?contentId=13098230#content/view/13098230
>> >
>> > make it very clear when changes are allowed or not and likely or not.
>> >
>> > if you think the verbiage is somehow ambiguous please help us make it
better.
>>
>> I'm not really worried about changes, I'm worried about a committment to
>> future compatibility. When we take code into the kernel (and most other
>> core systems projects) we're taking on the burden of supporting (until
>> someone can prove there are no more users), which is very difficult to
>> do when the ISA changes in an incompatible fashion. The whole point of
>> agreeing on the frozen thing was that it gave us a committment from the
>> specifcation authors that the future ISA would be compatible with th
>> frozen extensions.
>>
>> We're already in this spot with the V extension and the whole stable
>> thing, this definitaion of frozen looks very much like what was has led
>> to the issues there. Saying the spec won't change really isn't
>> meaningful, it's saying future specs will be compatible that's
>> important. Nothing in this whole rule touches on compatibility, and I
>> really don't want to end up in a bigger mess than we're already in.
>>
>> (Also: some PGE subcontractor drove a crane into my house, so things are
>> a bit chaotic on my end. If you have that list of what's officially
>> frozen, can you send it out? I'll try to take a look ASAP, as then I
>> can at least focus the discussion on what's relevant right now.)
>
> Here is the list of the specs that are frozen.
>
https://wiki.riscv.org/display/TECH/ISA+Extensions+On+Deck+for+Freeze+Milestone
How does that indicate what is frozen? I see "ISA Extensions On Deck
for Freeze Milestone" as the title, which makes it sound like these are
extension that are not yet frozen but will be eventually.
Any row with "top sheet" complete and "out for public review" is frozen.
The life cycle document[1] that I shared earlier in this thread also
says the same i.e. any specification that is out for public review is
frozen.
Stephano also sent out a public email about all the specifications
that are frozen.
However, I understand that you need to do a little bit of deduction to
understand what is frozen.
@Stephano(already cc'd here)
Can you add a separate column clearly indicating that "Freeze" status
for each of those specifications in the wiki link.
Is meant to be the complete list of what is frozen?
I'd expect any list of things that are frozen to contain the specs we've
been working with for a while (priv-1.11, all the user 2.0 specs, etc).
There was some talk about the SBI stuff that was called out as frozen
before this process not actually being frozen, are those other specs in
the same spot and if so are they going to end up being frozen?
That reminds me about this other set of specifications, sometimes called
software specifications. There's a list of "Non-ISA Extensions On Deck
for Freeze Milestone" here:
https://wiki.riscv.org/display/TECH/Non-ISA+Extensions+On+Deck+for+Freeze+Milestone
. That's got a frozen column in the table, but the table itself is
pretty much empty. We've had a bunch of confusing statements about
those specifications being frozen, were the statements inaccurate, is
that table inaccurate, and will that table be an additional list of
frozen specifications?
[1]
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1nQ5uFb39KA6gvUi5SReWfIQSiRN7hp6z7ZPfctE4mKk/edit#slide=id.p1
Scrolling down to the end of that list, it lists pointer masking. The
best I can find is
https://github.com/riscv/riscv-j-extension/blob/master/pointer-masking-proposal.adoc
, which says "Version: v0.1-draft", which definately doesn't sound
frozen. The README says "Working Draft of the RISC-V J Extension
Specification", which also doesn't sound frozen.
> I will let Mark comment on the compatibility thing.
>
>>
>> >
>> > Mark
>> > --------
>> > sent from a mobile device. please forgive any typos.
>> >
>> >> On Sep 27, 2021, at 8:50 AM, Palmer Dabbelt <pal...@dabbelt.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, 21 Sep 2021 17:20:17 PDT (-0700), ati...@atishpatra.org wrote:
>> >>> Hi All,
>> >>> Please find the below email from Stephano about the freeze announcement
for
>> >>> various RISC-V specifications that will be part of privilege
specification
>> >>> v1.12.
>> >>> All the review discussions are happening in the isa-dev mailing list. The
>> >>> review period will be open for 45 days ending Sunday October 31, 2021.
>> >>>
>> >>> I just want to highlight the fact that the *H*, *V, SvPBMT, CMO
extensions
>> >>> are frozen now. *This will help us merge some patches that have been
>> >>> present in the mailing list for a while.
>> >>>
>> >>> Here are the ratification policy and extension life cycle documents
present
>> >>> in the public. If you have any questions regarding this, please check
with
>> >>> Mark/Stephano (cc'd).
>> >>>
>> >>> Ratification policy:
>> >>>
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1-UlaSGqk59_myeuPMrV9gyuaIgnmFzGh5Gfy_tpViwM/edit
>> >>>
>> >>> Extension life cycle:
>> >>>
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1nQ5uFb39KA6gvUi5SReWfIQSiRN7hp6z7ZPfctE4mKk/edit#slide=id.p1
>> >>
>> >> I'm still buried after Plumbers, but one of the bits on my TODO list was
to look throught the new definitions for frozen and stable. Nothing in this extension life
cycle talks about the point at which compatibility will be maintained, which was really the
central point behind frozen before.
>> >>
>> >> Are there more concrete definitions somewhere?
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
> Atish
--
Regards,
Atish
