From: cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net   
      
   In article ,   
   John Dallman  wrote:   
   >In article <10ckbq2$7dr$4@reader2.panix.com>,   
   >cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) wrote:   
   >> Well, then I suppose they'll either split their product line or   
   >> introduce a 32-bit M profile for V9.   
   >   
   >They are effectively in the process of splitting the product line. The   
   >current instruction sets with a future are T32 and A64. A32 is on the way   
   >out.   
      
   100% agreed here.   
      
   >> I'm do not entirely agree with that assessment re: 64-bit in   
   >> MCUs, however: a lot of work is going into cryptographically   
   >> signed secure boot stacks and hardware attestation for firmware;   
   >> 64-bit registers can make implementing cryptography primitives   
   >> with large key sizes much easier.   
   >   
   >Fair point. The question would then be if it's worth creating a T64 or   
   >just a simplified A64. It seems likely ARM is discussing that internally   
   >or maybe even with some customers under NDA.   
      
   Indeed; this is my question.  I can well imagine that, at some   
   point, they would like to move away from T32 but continue with   
   supporting M-profile CPUs for the embedded market.  At that   
   point, some sort of T64 seems like a good idea.   
      
   I'm sure you're right that they're at least exploring it   
   internally; it will be interesting to see what they come up with   
   and how it compares against RV64C.   
      
   	- Dan C.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)