Date
1 - 3 of 3
"vsetvl[i] x0, x0" with vill in vtype
|
The second fix is just a clarification of a missing case in the spec:
"vsetvl[i] with rd=rs1=x0 is reserved if vill was 1 beforehand." The "vsetvl[i] x0, x0" form is defined in terms of whether VLMAX and hence vl might change, but if the vtype setting has vill set, then there is no valid existing VLMAX. Krste
|
|
|
|
any possible compatibility issues (i can't see any but not sure) in this one with existing implementations like you discussed in the first one?
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Mark -------- sent from a mobile device. please forgive any typos.
On Nov 2, 2022, at 12:01 AM, Krste Asanovic <krste@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
The definition of this case was missing, so there is nothing to be
incompatible with. This case only happens with buggy software. In practice, I expect most implementations will have decided to keep vill set, but making the operation "reserved" allows any current behavior to be accomodated. Krste | any possible compatibility issues (i can't see any but not sure) in this one with existing implementations like you discussed in the first one?On Wed, 2 Nov 2022 00:07:02 -0700, Mark Himelstein <markhimelstein@...> said: | Mark | -------- | sent from a mobile device. please forgive any typos. || On Nov 2, 2022, at 12:01 AM, Krste Asanovic <krste@...> wrote: || || || The second fix is just a clarification of a missing case in the spec: || || "vsetvl[i] with rd=rs1=x0 is reserved if vill was 1 beforehand." || || The "vsetvl[i] x0, x0" form is defined in terms of whether VLMAX and || hence vl might change, but if the vtype setting has vill set, then || there is no valid existing VLMAX. || || Krste || || || || ||
|
|
|