[libre-riscv-dev] [isa-dev] Re: FP transcendentals (trigonometry, root/exp/log) proposal

[Allen J. Baum]

At 8:26 PM -0700 8/8/19, lkcl wrote:
>On Thursday, August 8, 2019 at 10:55:27 PM UTC+8, Allen Baum wrote:
>> From my point of view, it needs to match the reference model for any ratified standard., else it won't be labeled compliant.
>
>You mean RV compliance? It also needs to realistically meet customer demand.
>
>In the market dominated by AMD and NVidia that gives one driving factor: compliance with Khronos specifications. Failure to meet these predefined requirements will automatically result in market rejection.

Well, yes an no. The "my point of view" part is important.
>From a RV Compliance framework point of view, we will only support RV standards.
OR, another way of looking at it, is that we won't support custom extensions.

The right custom extension could be a billion dollar business, but there will be no (officially supported) way to have the reference model compare it to a test target. A developer could claim compliance with a custom platform that requires everything except the custom extension (and be allowed to use the trademark)., It  (or a customer) could then have a separate test suite to ensure the custom extension that the customer has required will work/
But unless it becomes a ratified standard, the RV Compliance Framework and Test Suite just won't deal with it.

If the customer is big enough, and the market is big enough, maybe that custom extension becomes a standard - at which point it all works.

-- 
**************************************************
* Allen Baum              tel. (908)BIT-BAUM     *
*                                   248-2286     *     
**************************************************