riscv-isa-manual
riscv-bitmanip
riscv-isa-manual | riscv-bitmanip | |
---|---|---|
41 | 12 | |
3,378 | 207 | |
2.8% | 0.5% | |
9.7 | 0.0 | |
9 days ago | 3 months ago | |
TeX | Makefile | |
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 | Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 |
Stars - the number of stars that a project has on GitHub. Growth - month over month growth in stars.
Activity is a relative number indicating how actively a project is being developed. Recent commits have higher weight than older ones.
For example, an activity of 9.0 indicates that a project is amongst the top 10% of the most actively developed projects that we are tracking.
riscv-isa-manual
-
The Improved RISC-V Specification (latest WIP draft)
https://github.com/riscv/riscv-isa-manual/releases
Regarding the recent "How to improve the RISC-V specification" post [0], I just wanted to point out, that the latest draft manual is already a great improvement. (see link above)
It includes a lot of the newly ratified extensions: bitmanip,zicond,vector,vector crypto, ...
And there are a bunch of included SAIL definitions for bitmanip and zicond, but other instructions are still missing the SAIL code. Most notably, the SAIL definitions from the RV32I/RV64I base isa are also missing.
I asked for the further SAIL integration plans here: https://github.com/riscv/riscv-isa-manual/issues/1369
Here is an example SAIL snippet from cpopw:
let bitcount = 0;
-
How to improve the RISC-V specification
I encourage you to look at the newest isa manual draft on github: https://github.com/riscv/riscv-isa-manual/releases
It includes the more recently extensions, and e.g. the bitmanip instructions all have associated pseudo code.
Here is e.g. the code for cpopw:
let bitcount = 0;
- Need help with designing a basic RISC V processor?
-
The legend of “x86 CPUs decode instructions into RISC form internally”
I tried searching the spec [1] for "overflow" and here is what it says at page 17:
> We did not include special instruction-set support for overflow checks on integer arithmetic operations in the base instruction set, as many overflow checks can be cheaply implemented using RISC-V branches.
> For general signed addition, three additional instructions after the addition are required
Is this "cheap", replacing 1 instruction with four? According to some old mainframe era research (cannot find link now), addition is the most often used instruction and they suggest that we should replace each one with four?
Their "rationale" is not rational at all. It doesn't make sense.
Overflow check should be free (no additional instructions required), otherwise we will see the same story we have seen for last 50 years: compiler writers do not want to implement checks because they are expensive; language designers do not want to use proper arithmetic because it is expensive. As a result, there will be errors and vulnerabilities. A vicious circle.
[1] https://github.com/riscv/riscv-isa-manual/releases/download/...
- 64-bit Arm ∩ 64-bit RISC V
- Beginner question: F extension
-
Riscv Ghidra Instruction Manual
Why not use the actual release PDF instead from their github? https://github.com/riscv/riscv-isa-manual
-
How would I go about designing an 8-bit RISC-V CPU? Is it possible?
https://github.com/riscv/riscv-isa-manual/releases/download/Priv-v1.12/riscv-privileged-20211203.pdf Part 2
-
Have to convert a C language code into RISC-V MIPS
If you don't want to cheat then read the RISC-V ISA manual: https://github.com/riscv/riscv-isa-manual/releases/download/Ratified-IMAFDQC/riscv-spec-20191213.pdf
-
How does a computer understand machine language?
Yeah you are on the right track. Processors are designed on top of an Instruction Set Architecture (ISA). For an example you can look on top of the RISC-V specifications:https://github.com/riscv/riscv-isa-manual/releases/download/Ratified-IMAFDQC/riscv-spec-20191213.pdf (possible PDF download)
riscv-bitmanip
-
You Won’t Believe This One Weird CPU Instruction (2019)
The bit manipulation [0] extension has been ratified for a while now and is part of the RVA22 application extension profile [1].
You can already buy SOCs that support it, e.g. vision five 2 and star64.
Interestingly the risc-v vector has it's own popcount instructions for vector registers/register masks. This is needed, because the scalable architecture doesn't guarantee that a vector mask can fit into a 64 bit register, so vector masks are stored in a single LMUL=1 register. This works really well, because with LMUL=8 and SEW=8 you get 100% utilization of the single LMUL=1 vector register.
Another interesting thing is that the vector crypto extension will likely introduce a element wise popcount instruction.
[0] https://github.com/riscv/riscv-bitmanip/releases/download/1....
[1] https://github.com/riscv/riscv-profiles/blob/main/profiles.a...
-
Is Bit Manipulation extension ratified?
According to latest version of spec on GitHub (https://github.com/riscv/riscv-bitmanip) Bit-manip is in frozen state. Is this ratified and not updated in the sepc document or is it actually frozen?
- Hand optimised RISC-V assembly language clz
-
Testing for presence of _Zba and _Zbb
I guess 0x20a52533 is a specific _zba instruction? Which one? I searched for "001000" (the left 6 bits of 0x20) in https://github.com/riscv/riscv-bitmanip/releases/download/1.0.0/bitmanip-1.0.0-38-g865e7a7.pdf , but couldn't find a match? Might be PEBKAC.
-
A Neat XOR Trick
RISC-V does have a proposed extension Zbb that includes the cpop and cpopw instructions. It doesn't seem to have much recent activity, though.
https://github.com/riscv/riscv-bitmanip/blob/main/bitmanip/i...
- Why aren't there any RISC-V cores with desktop level power?
-
Cores with V-extension and Linux support
Enabling B use in dynamically linked libc code will improve every application, especially for example use of orc.b in the C string functions, which is what I invented it for https://github.com/riscv/riscv-bitmanip/issues/41 (using V is even better, but that's optional in RVA22)
-
Bitmanip: Missing bit field extract / insert instructions?
[2] https://github.com/riscv/riscv-bitmanip/releases/tag/1.0.0
-
gmp: "Risc V is a terrible architecture"
There was a pick instruction, literally named cmov, in an older version of the B (bitmanip) extension (all the good stuff is in extensions). But it seems like it got canned or something, it's not in it anymore (various other interesting instructions were also lost). Silly if you ask me, but I haven't kept up with any of the debate, maybe there's a decent reason..
-
RISC-V Int. Ratifies 15 New Specs, Opening Up New RISC-V Design Possibilities
Yoe maybe interested in the just ratified "RISC-V Bit-Manipulation ISA-extensions" https://github.com/riscv/riscv-bitmanip/releases/download/1....
What are some alternatives?
riscv-elf-psabi-doc - A RISC-V ELF psABI Document
riscv-v-spec - Working draft of the proposed RISC-V V vector extension
riscv-emulator-docker-image
riscv-sbi-doc - Documentation for the RISC-V Supervisor Binary Interface
amaranth - A modern hardware definition language and toolchain based on Python
riscv-crypto - RISC-V cryptography extensions standardisation work.
nytm-spelling-bee - Generate anagram puzzles like Frank Longo's "Spelling Bee" as in New York Times Magazine
vroom - VRoom! RISC-V CPU
cpu_features - A cross platform C99 library to get cpu features at runtime.
open-source-cs - Video discussing this curriculum:
riscv-platform-specs - RISC-V Profiles and Platform Specification