From: cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net   
      
   In article ,   
   John Dallman  wrote:   
   >In article <10c61pt$sa8$1@reader2.panix.com>,   
   >cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) wrote:   
   >   
   >> Yeah, I understand the profiles idea, but it's supporting that   
   >> smaller set of extensions discoverable at run-time that's the   
   >> problem.  I know a lot of people working on RISC-V firmware, and   
   >> this (and the forced use of the SBI) seems to be the major   
   >> sources of friction.  Folks have gone as far as calling it a   
   >> "soft core target."   
   >   
   >Aha. I'd be working on application libraries, and would simply assume the   
   >basics of the profile and ignore the optional parts. Different viewpoint.   
      
   Ah, ok; that's fair.  I'd guess this would mostly affect things   
   at the application level with respect to the vector extensions,   
   and if you don't care about that (or don't invoke the compiler   
   in a way that those instructions are emitted) then no big deal.   
      
   	- Dan C.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)