You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Does it possible to clarify version for G extension, current ISA spec version scheme no longer using major/minor version number, so the version for G would become very confusing, so I think does it possible to forbid version appear with G at spec?
I saw the usage of G with version was all removed at a782627 , but I would like have an more explicitly wording on this.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
There is a closely related problem with implied extensions. D implies F, and F implies Zicsr, so if someone specifies d2p2 what if anything does that imply about the f and Zicsr versions? The D and F extensions seem to be in lock step, so making d2p2 mean f2p2_d2p2 might be OK. But F and Zicsr are not in lock step, so f2p2 can't imply zicsr2p2 as there is no 2p2 version of zicsr. We could forbid a version spec when an extension implies another. Or we could say that a version spec is OK when an extension implies another, but the implied extension will have an unknown version number. Or we could set up a table so that D versionX implies F versionY implies zicsr versionZ. Or maybe there is another solution.
Does it possible to clarify version for G extension, current ISA spec version scheme no longer using major/minor version number, so the version for G would become very confusing, so I think does it possible to forbid version appear with G at spec?
I saw the usage of G with version was all removed at a782627 , but I would like have an more explicitly wording on this.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: