-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 28
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Is Ssccptr a ratified extension? #121
Comments
It was ratified as part of RVA20/22 profile ratification. The profiles introduced a number of extension names for previously unnamed optional features in the unprivileged and privileged architectures. This specific feature mandates that memory with cacheable and coherence attributes must support page table reads, or more informally, the OS can put page tables in any of the regular memory it can access. |
I appreciate the clarification. There is a missing extension name "Ssccptr" on the status website (https://wiki.riscv.org/display/HOME/Specification+Status). |
Further discussions after the introduction of rva22 support in QEMU revealed that what we've been calling 'named features' are actually regular extensions, with their respective riscv,isa DTs. This is clarified in [1]. [2] is a bug tracker asking for the profile spec to be less cryptic about it. As far as QEMU goes we understand extensions as something that the user can enable/disable in the command line. This isn't the case for named features, so we'll have to reach a middle ground. We'll keep our existing nomenclature 'named features' to refer to any extension that the user can't control in the command line. We'll also do the following: - 'svade' and 'zic64b' flags are renamed to 'ext_svade' and 'ext_zic64b'. 'ext_svade' and 'ext_zic64b' now have riscv,isa strings and priv_spec versions; - skip name feature check in cpu_bump_multi_ext_priv_ver(). Now that named features have a riscv,isa and an entry in isa_edata_arr[] we don't need to gate the call to cpu_cfg_ext_get_min_version() anymore. [1] riscv/riscv-profiles#121 [2] riscv/riscv-profiles#142 Signed-off-by: Daniel Henrique Barboza <dbarboza@ventanamicro.com> Message-Id: <20240125195319.329181-3-dbarboza@ventanamicro.com>
Further discussions after the introduction of rva22 support in QEMU revealed that what we've been calling 'named features' are actually regular extensions, with their respective riscv,isa DTs. This is clarified in [1]. [2] is a bug tracker asking for the profile spec to be less cryptic about it. As far as QEMU goes we understand extensions as something that the user can enable/disable in the command line. This isn't the case for named features, so we'll have to reach a middle ground. We'll keep our existing nomenclature 'named features' to refer to any extension that the user can't control in the command line. We'll also do the following: - 'svade' and 'zic64b' flags are renamed to 'ext_svade' and 'ext_zic64b'. 'ext_svade' and 'ext_zic64b' now have riscv,isa strings and priv_spec versions; - skip name feature check in cpu_bump_multi_ext_priv_ver(). Now that named features have a riscv,isa and an entry in isa_edata_arr[] we don't need to gate the call to cpu_cfg_ext_get_min_version() anymore. [1] riscv/riscv-profiles#121 [2] riscv/riscv-profiles#142 Signed-off-by: Daniel Henrique Barboza <dbarboza@ventanamicro.com> Reviewed-by: Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com> Message-Id: <20240126133101.61344-10-ajones@ventanamicro.com>
Further discussions after the introduction of rva22 support in QEMU revealed that what we've been calling 'named features' are actually regular extensions, with their respective riscv,isa DTs. This is clarified in [1]. [2] is a bug tracker asking for the profile spec to be less cryptic about it. As far as QEMU goes we understand extensions as something that the user can enable/disable in the command line. This isn't the case for named features, so we'll have to reach a middle ground. We'll keep our existing nomenclature 'named features' to refer to any extension that the user can't control in the command line. We'll also do the following: - 'svade' and 'zic64b' flags are renamed to 'ext_svade' and 'ext_zic64b'. 'ext_svade' and 'ext_zic64b' now have riscv,isa strings and priv_spec versions; - skip name feature check in cpu_bump_multi_ext_priv_ver(). Now that named features have a riscv,isa and an entry in isa_edata_arr[] we don't need to gate the call to cpu_cfg_ext_get_min_version() anymore. [1] riscv/riscv-profiles#121 [2] riscv/riscv-profiles#142 Signed-off-by: Daniel Henrique Barboza <dbarboza@ventanamicro.com> Message-Id: <20240125195319.329181-3-dbarboza@ventanamicro.com>
Further discussions after the introduction of rva22 support in QEMU revealed that what we've been calling 'named features' are actually regular extensions, with their respective riscv,isa DTs. This is clarified in [1]. [2] is a bug tracker asking for the profile spec to be less cryptic about it. As far as QEMU goes we understand extensions as something that the user can enable/disable in the command line. This isn't the case for named features, so we'll have to reach a middle ground. We'll keep our existing nomenclature 'named features' to refer to any extension that the user can't control in the command line. We'll also do the following: - 'svade' and 'zic64b' flags are renamed to 'ext_svade' and 'ext_zic64b'. 'ext_svade' and 'ext_zic64b' now have riscv,isa strings and priv_spec versions; - skip name feature check in cpu_bump_multi_ext_priv_ver(). Now that named features have a riscv,isa and an entry in isa_edata_arr[] we don't need to gate the call to cpu_cfg_ext_get_min_version() anymore. [1] riscv/riscv-profiles#121 [2] riscv/riscv-profiles#142 Signed-off-by: Daniel Henrique Barboza <dbarboza@ventanamicro.com> Reviewed-by: Alistair Francis <alistair.francis@wdc.com> Message-Id: <20240125195319.329181-3-dbarboza@ventanamicro.com>
Further discussions after the introduction of rva22 support in QEMU revealed that what we've been calling 'named features' are actually regular extensions, with their respective riscv,isa DTs. This is clarified in [1]. [2] is a bug tracker asking for the profile spec to be less cryptic about it. As far as QEMU goes we understand extensions as something that the user can enable/disable in the command line. This isn't the case for named features, so we'll have to reach a middle ground. We'll keep our existing nomenclature 'named features' to refer to any extension that the user can't control in the command line. We'll also do the following: - 'svade' and 'zic64b' flags are renamed to 'ext_svade' and 'ext_zic64b'. 'ext_svade' and 'ext_zic64b' now have riscv,isa strings and priv_spec versions; - skip name feature check in cpu_bump_multi_ext_priv_ver(). Now that named features have a riscv,isa and an entry in isa_edata_arr[] we don't need to gate the call to cpu_cfg_ext_get_min_version() anymore. [1] riscv/riscv-profiles#121 [2] riscv/riscv-profiles#142 Signed-off-by: Daniel Henrique Barboza <dbarboza@ventanamicro.com> Reviewed-by: Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com> Reviewed-by: Alistair Francis <alistair.francis@wdc.com> Message-Id: <20240202152154.773253-3-dbarboza@ventanamicro.com>
Further discussions after the introduction of rva22 support in QEMU revealed that what we've been calling 'named features' are actually regular extensions, with their respective riscv,isa DTs. This is clarified in [1]. [2] is a bug tracker asking for the profile spec to be less cryptic about it. As far as QEMU goes we understand extensions as something that the user can enable/disable in the command line. This isn't the case for named features, so we'll have to reach a middle ground. We'll keep our existing nomenclature 'named features' to refer to any extension that the user can't control in the command line. We'll also do the following: - 'svade' and 'zic64b' flags are renamed to 'ext_svade' and 'ext_zic64b'. 'ext_svade' and 'ext_zic64b' now have riscv,isa strings and priv_spec versions; - skip name feature check in cpu_bump_multi_ext_priv_ver(). Now that named features have a riscv,isa and an entry in isa_edata_arr[] we don't need to gate the call to cpu_cfg_ext_get_min_version() anymore. [1] riscv/riscv-profiles#121 [2] riscv/riscv-profiles#142 Signed-off-by: Daniel Henrique Barboza <dbarboza@ventanamicro.com> Reviewed-by: Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com> Reviewed-by: Alistair Francis <alistair.francis@wdc.com> Message-Id: <20240202152154.773253-3-dbarboza@ventanamicro.com>
Further discussions after the introduction of rva22 support in QEMU revealed that what we've been calling 'named features' are actually regular extensions, with their respective riscv,isa DTs. This is clarified in [1]. [2] is a bug tracker asking for the profile spec to be less cryptic about it. As far as QEMU goes we understand extensions as something that the user can enable/disable in the command line. This isn't the case for named features, so we'll have to reach a middle ground. We'll keep our existing nomenclature 'named features' to refer to any extension that the user can't control in the command line. We'll also do the following: - 'svade' and 'zic64b' flags are renamed to 'ext_svade' and 'ext_zic64b'. 'ext_svade' and 'ext_zic64b' now have riscv,isa strings and priv_spec versions; - skip name feature check in cpu_bump_multi_ext_priv_ver(). Now that named features have a riscv,isa and an entry in isa_edata_arr[] we don't need to gate the call to cpu_cfg_ext_get_min_version() anymore. [1] riscv/riscv-profiles#121 [2] riscv/riscv-profiles#142 Signed-off-by: Daniel Henrique Barboza <dbarboza@ventanamicro.com> Reviewed-by: Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com> Reviewed-by: Alistair Francis <alistair.francis@wdc.com> Message-Id: <20240215223955.969568-3-dbarboza@ventanamicro.com>
Further discussions after the introduction of rva22 support in QEMU revealed that what we've been calling 'named features' are actually regular extensions, with their respective riscv,isa DTs. This is clarified in [1]. [2] is a bug tracker asking for the profile spec to be less cryptic about it. As far as QEMU goes we understand extensions as something that the user can enable/disable in the command line. This isn't the case for named features, so we'll have to reach a middle ground. We'll keep our existing nomenclature 'named features' to refer to any extension that the user can't control in the command line. We'll also do the following: - 'svade' and 'zic64b' flags are renamed to 'ext_svade' and 'ext_zic64b'. 'ext_svade' and 'ext_zic64b' now have riscv,isa strings and priv_spec versions; - skip name feature check in cpu_bump_multi_ext_priv_ver(). Now that named features have a riscv,isa and an entry in isa_edata_arr[] we don't need to gate the call to cpu_cfg_ext_get_min_version() anymore. [1] riscv/riscv-profiles#121 [2] riscv/riscv-profiles#142 Signed-off-by: Daniel Henrique Barboza <dbarboza@ventanamicro.com> Reviewed-by: Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com> Reviewed-by: Alistair Francis <alistair.francis@wdc.com> Message-Id: <20240215223955.969568-3-dbarboza@ventanamicro.com>
Further discussions after the introduction of rva22 support in QEMU revealed that what we've been calling 'named features' are actually regular extensions, with their respective riscv,isa DTs. This is clarified in [1]. [2] is a bug tracker asking for the profile spec to be less cryptic about it. As far as QEMU goes we understand extensions as something that the user can enable/disable in the command line. This isn't the case for named features, so we'll have to reach a middle ground. We'll keep our existing nomenclature 'named features' to refer to any extension that the user can't control in the command line. We'll also do the following: - 'svade' and 'zic64b' flags are renamed to 'ext_svade' and 'ext_zic64b'. 'ext_svade' and 'ext_zic64b' now have riscv,isa strings and priv_spec versions; - skip name feature check in cpu_bump_multi_ext_priv_ver(). Now that named features have a riscv,isa and an entry in isa_edata_arr[] we don't need to gate the call to cpu_cfg_ext_get_min_version() anymore. [1] riscv/riscv-profiles#121 [2] riscv/riscv-profiles#142 Signed-off-by: Daniel Henrique Barboza <dbarboza@ventanamicro.com> Reviewed-by: Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com> Reviewed-by: Alistair Francis <alistair.francis@wdc.com> Message-ID: <20240215223955.969568-3-dbarboza@ventanamicro.com>
Further discussions after the introduction of rva22 support in QEMU revealed that what we've been calling 'named features' are actually regular extensions, with their respective riscv,isa DTs. This is clarified in [1]. [2] is a bug tracker asking for the profile spec to be less cryptic about it. As far as QEMU goes we understand extensions as something that the user can enable/disable in the command line. This isn't the case for named features, so we'll have to reach a middle ground. We'll keep our existing nomenclature 'named features' to refer to any extension that the user can't control in the command line. We'll also do the following: - 'svade' and 'zic64b' flags are renamed to 'ext_svade' and 'ext_zic64b'. 'ext_svade' and 'ext_zic64b' now have riscv,isa strings and priv_spec versions; - skip name feature check in cpu_bump_multi_ext_priv_ver(). Now that named features have a riscv,isa and an entry in isa_edata_arr[] we don't need to gate the call to cpu_cfg_ext_get_min_version() anymore. [1] riscv/riscv-profiles#121 [2] riscv/riscv-profiles#142 Signed-off-by: Daniel Henrique Barboza <dbarboza@ventanamicro.com> Reviewed-by: Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com> Reviewed-by: Alistair Francis <alistair.francis@wdc.com> Message-ID: <20240215223955.969568-3-dbarboza@ventanamicro.com>
Further discussions after the introduction of rva22 support in QEMU revealed that what we've been calling 'named features' are actually regular extensions, with their respective riscv,isa DTs. This is clarified in [1]. [2] is a bug tracker asking for the profile spec to be less cryptic about it. As far as QEMU goes we understand extensions as something that the user can enable/disable in the command line. This isn't the case for named features, so we'll have to reach a middle ground. We'll keep our existing nomenclature 'named features' to refer to any extension that the user can't control in the command line. We'll also do the following: - 'svade' and 'zic64b' flags are renamed to 'ext_svade' and 'ext_zic64b'. 'ext_svade' and 'ext_zic64b' now have riscv,isa strings and priv_spec versions; - skip name feature check in cpu_bump_multi_ext_priv_ver(). Now that named features have a riscv,isa and an entry in isa_edata_arr[] we don't need to gate the call to cpu_cfg_ext_get_min_version() anymore. [1] riscv/riscv-profiles#121 [2] riscv/riscv-profiles#142 Signed-off-by: Daniel Henrique Barboza <dbarboza@ventanamicro.com> Reviewed-by: Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com> Reviewed-by: Alistair Francis <alistair.francis@wdc.com> Message-ID: <20240215223955.969568-3-dbarboza@ventanamicro.com>
Further discussions after the introduction of rva22 support in QEMU revealed that what we've been calling 'named features' are actually regular extensions, with their respective riscv,isa DTs. This is clarified in [1]. [2] is a bug tracker asking for the profile spec to be less cryptic about it. As far as QEMU goes we understand extensions as something that the user can enable/disable in the command line. This isn't the case for named features, so we'll have to reach a middle ground. We'll keep our existing nomenclature 'named features' to refer to any extension that the user can't control in the command line. We'll also do the following: - 'svade' and 'zic64b' flags are renamed to 'ext_svade' and 'ext_zic64b'. 'ext_svade' and 'ext_zic64b' now have riscv,isa strings and priv_spec versions; - skip name feature check in cpu_bump_multi_ext_priv_ver(). Now that named features have a riscv,isa and an entry in isa_edata_arr[] we don't need to gate the call to cpu_cfg_ext_get_min_version() anymore. [1] riscv/riscv-profiles#121 [2] riscv/riscv-profiles#142 Signed-off-by: Daniel Henrique Barboza <dbarboza@ventanamicro.com> Reviewed-by: Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com> Reviewed-by: Alistair Francis <alistair.francis@wdc.com> Message-ID: <20240215223955.969568-3-dbarboza@ventanamicro.com> Signed-off-by: Alistair Francis <alistair.francis@wdc.com>
Further discussions after the introduction of rva22 support in QEMU revealed that what we've been calling 'named features' are actually regular extensions, with their respective riscv,isa DTs. This is clarified in [1]. [2] is a bug tracker asking for the profile spec to be less cryptic about it. As far as QEMU goes we understand extensions as something that the user can enable/disable in the command line. This isn't the case for named features, so we'll have to reach a middle ground. We'll keep our existing nomenclature 'named features' to refer to any extension that the user can't control in the command line. We'll also do the following: - 'svade' and 'zic64b' flags are renamed to 'ext_svade' and 'ext_zic64b'. 'ext_svade' and 'ext_zic64b' now have riscv,isa strings and priv_spec versions; - skip name feature check in cpu_bump_multi_ext_priv_ver(). Now that named features have a riscv,isa and an entry in isa_edata_arr[] we don't need to gate the call to cpu_cfg_ext_get_min_version() anymore. [1] riscv/riscv-profiles#121 [2] riscv/riscv-profiles#142 Signed-off-by: Daniel Henrique Barboza <dbarboza@ventanamicro.com> Reviewed-by: Andrew Jones <ajones@ventanamicro.com> Reviewed-by: Alistair Francis <alistair.francis@wdc.com> Message-ID: <20240215223955.969568-3-dbarboza@ventanamicro.com> Signed-off-by: Alistair Francis <alistair.francis@wdc.com> Message-Id: <20240308111152.2856137-9-alistair.francis@wdc.com>
Hello,
The Ssccptr is a mandatory extension of the profile. However, I cannot find the extension on the status website (https://wiki.riscv.org/display/HOME/Specification+Status).
Is Ssccptr an official ratified extension?
Best regards,
YenHaoChen
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: