Re: RISC-V Vector Extension post-public review updates
That’s great news, thanks Krste!
The current specification allows some instructions to have two vector
(cue folks furiously trying to construct one...)
haha i tried but can’t think of a use case !!
We do have a choice of:
I don’t have a strong opinion, but I prefer a route that allows us to recover those instruction encodings — they seem to be getting scarce hence represent value. You said there were already requests for extra instructions — would this space be usef for any of them (or other as-yet-unforeeen instructions)?
Does (3) give us the best route to reuse the encodings in the future? I’m a bit confused about the permanence of (1), and I don’t like the possibility software fragmentation that will arise from (2).