Bug 1060 - OPF RFC ls009 questions and feedback
Summary: OPF RFC ls009 questions and feedback
Alias: None
Product: Libre-SOC's first SoC
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Specification (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Hardware: PC Linux
: --- enhancement
Assignee: Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
URL: https://libre-soc.org/openpower/sv/rf...
Depends on: 1042
Blocks: 1096
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2023-04-16 15:54 BST by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
Modified: 2023-11-14 01:35 GMT (History)
3 users (show)

See Also:
NLnet milestone: NLnet.2022-08-051.OPF
total budget (EUR) for completion of task and all subtasks: 3500
budget (EUR) for this task, excluding subtasks' budget: 3500
parent task for budget allocation: 1012
child tasks for budget allocation:
The table of payments (in EUR) for this task; TOML format:
lkcl = { amount = 3200, submitted = 2023-10-09 } [jacob] amount = 300 submitted = 2023-10-15 paid = 2023-11-10


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton 2023-04-16 15:54:25 BST
ls009 v1 submitted formally on 16apr2023 there will be questions
iterations and feedback.


* TODO parallel prefix sum in REMAP page
* TODO jacob some justification examples
       (went by on IRC v. quick)
* TODO add bit in SVSTATE which allows for interrupts
Comment 1 Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton 2023-04-26 21:44:34 BST
bug #1071 - parallel prefix sum is missing from REMAP.
Comment 3 Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton 2023-04-30 17:02:11 BST
(In reply to Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton from comment #1)
> bug #1071 - parallel prefix sum is missing from REMAP.

jacob has implemented parallel prefix sum, work-efficient:
TODO cut over new pseudocode for svshape
Comment 4 Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton 2023-04-30 17:10:49 BST
Comment 5 Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton 2023-05-01 12:56:34 BST

beginnings of parallel prefix sum
Comment 6 Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton 2023-10-10 10:50:02 BST
this bugreport is being closed as the "feedback" has been received,
this was the purpose of the RFC.  some of that feedback has actually
already now been implemented, some has not however the primary objective
of the RFC is not *to implement* but to gain feedback and discussion.
some of that discussion was under the Commercial Confidentiality of
the OPF ISA WG and discussions are ongoing to "extract" that from
the Confidential regime of the OPF ISA WG.