Hi all,
My workmate and I have been working on Vector & Dsp extension, and
I'd like to share develop status with folks.
The spec references for Vector extension is riscv-v-spec-0.7.1, and
riscv-p-spec-0.5 for DSP extension.
Hello, Liu.
I will not answer your questions directly, however I want to bring to you and others another perspective on this situation.
First, please provide the link to the specifications. Via Google, I found that "riscv-v-spec-0.7.1" is titled "Working draft of the proposed RISC-V V vector extension". I could not find "riscv-p-spec-0.5".
I am not sure what the QEMU policy towards "working draft proposal" type of specification is. Peter, can you perhaps clarify that or any other related issue?
I would advice some caution in these cases. The major issue is backward compatibility, but there are other issues too. Let's say, fairness. If we let emulation of a component based on a "working draft proposal" be integrated into QEMU, this will set a precedent, and many other developer would rightfully ask for their contributions based on drafts to be integrated into QEMU. Our policy should be as equal as possible to all contribution, large or small, riscv or alpha, cpu or device, tcg or kvm - in my honest opinion. QEMU upstream should not be a collecting place for all imaginable experimentations, certain criteria on what is appropriate for upstreaming exist and must continue to exist.
Yours,
Aleksandar
The code of vector extension is
ready and under testing, the first patch will be sent about two weeks
later. After that we will forward working on DSP extension, and send the
first patch in middle October.
Could the maintainers tell me whether the specs referenced are
appropriate? Is anyone working on these extensions? I'd like to get
your status, and maybe discuss questions and work togather.
Best Regards
LIU Zhiwei