[Libre-soc-isa] [Bug 1052] OPF RFC ls012 writeup: list of RFCs to be proposed to OPF ISA WG

[bugzilla-daemon at libre-soc.org]

https://bugs.libre-soc.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1052

Andrey Miroshnikov <andrey at technepisteme.xyz> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |andrey at technepisteme.xyz

--- Comment #2 from Andrey Miroshnikov <andrey at technepisteme.xyz> ---
Spotted a typo.
https://git.libre-soc.org/?p=libreriscv.git;a=commitdiff;h=5f97d3ff1df16450a6cc9ef8cb5b38db6f4c471d

In the Bitmanip LUT2/3 section (page 3), the wording of
"SFFS needs to be stand-alone on its own merits and not "punished" should an
implementor choose not to implement any aspect of PackedSIMD VSX."

"punished" may come out a little strong to certain parties. Now I may be
finicky, but you know how vigilant in regards to wording we need to be.


In the Tables section (page 4), "mutually exclusively" doesn't sound right to
me.


Initially I couldn't find the explanation for the "cost" column, but then
realised the description calls it "XO Cost". I suggest the actual table column
is also called "XO Cost" to reduce ambiguity.

Another issue I found is that entries under PO1 column are "??" for LD/ST Post
Increment, though that might be a problem with the pdf generation.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.