riscv-isa-manual
riscv-isa-manual copied to clipboard
riscv
Preface update
Updated the Preface in Unpriv and Priv in anticipation of publishing both for internal review. Note that Unpriv change history goes back to move to asciidoc and Priv changes go back to v1.13.
@aswaterman have you had a chance to take a look at these preface updates? Once merged, we can publish PDFs for internal review. Note that the Unpriv changelog does not go all the way back to 2019, as that would have been a bit too much.
@aswaterman I've applied your two suggestions. If we're good to go, I'll publish today.
Two more things.
I really don't like including the git commit history in the preface. If people want to see that, they can open up the git repository. In this case, writing "The inclusion of all ratified extensions through March 2024" suffices. (Capitalizing ALL is stylistically inconsistent.)
Second, do we really need to declare 20240326 as its own release? Can't we just fold these two releases together? Normally, we only split off the old preface and start a new preface when we make a final release. These intermediate draft releases don't warrant doing that.
So are you referring to the priv-preface with your last comment? That is, roll 20240326 and 1.13 into each other. If yes, do we go with 20240326 or 1.13?
Sorry, @wmat, I misread the PR. I thought it was the previous preface, not the privileged preface. Disregard.
One last one before we can merge this: can you restore the one preface entry that you deleted? https://github.com/riscv/riscv-isa-manual/pull/1299/files#diff-532a9fe2a40c6696777f2473a7a54fd9dda4bbe75ae915501a64016c92d6144aL51-L52
I assume you're referring to the line about the draft Zam extension? I've just restored it.
On Wed, Apr 3, 2024 at 8:05 PM Andrew Waterman @.***> wrote:
Sorry, @wmat https://github.com/wmat, I misread the PR. I thought it was the previous preface, not the privileged preface. Disregard.
One last one before we can merge this: can you restore the one preface entry that you deleted? https://github.com/riscv/riscv-isa-manual/pull/1299/files#diff-532a9fe2a40c6696777f2473a7a54fd9dda4bbe75ae915501a64016c92d6144aL51-L52
— Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/riscv/riscv-isa-manual/pull/1299#issuecomment-2035829572, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAAN6ZD53FPJGMAA7KYLKYLY3SKK7AVCNFSM6AAAAABFK4HN4WVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDAMZVHAZDSNJXGI . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: @.***>
@wmat It should go in the unpriv preface, not the priv preface. (Zam was an unpriv extension.)
You can put it right after the changelog entry about inclusion of all ratified extensions.
There's a merge conflict re: the font-size fix you made earlier today. Feel free to merge after you've resolved it (in a way that doesn't break the CSR tables again :))
I downloaded RISC-V ISA Manual, version 20240411 and some of these extensions have a star (*), e.g. *Zbkb. I don't see a footnote or something to explain it. Is this a typo and this was suppose to be bold?
The table suggests that Zbkb is ratified, but looking at 28.4.5. Zbkb: Bit-manipulation for Cryptography I see a not The Zbkb extension is frozen. Looking at wiki ( https://wiki.riscv.org/display/HOME/Ratified+Extensions ) I see that Zbkb was ratified in November 2021.
The same applies to Zbkc, Zbkx. I didn't check the rest.
