Re: Questions on HPMs
On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 8:26 AM Ved Shanbhogue <ved@...> wrote:
Since Sscofmpf is still not ratified a second extension could be avoided if its just
folded into the current extension. Is that an option?
Over the past year RVI (the TSC especially) has clearly moved towards expecting extensions to be developed as smaller separate extensions instead of being glommed together in longer development efforts. TG's going forward will all have tightly focused and well defined charters, with a more bounded timeline to produce a specific ratified standard. The intent is to standardize basic important functionality sooner, and then come back around in a second (or even third) development phase to standardize secondary features, additional features, and/or feature enhancements. (The CMO group is an example of this.) Fast track extensions are intended to focus on one limited architecture extension; further fast track extensions can add on further features.
Also note that adding functionality to an extension while in development is not just a matter of writing a larger spec, but of expanding the amount of work to be done with respect to all the required DoD (Definition of Done) tasks (e.g. ACTs, Spike/QEMU/SAIL support, toolchain and software support, PoCs).