Add Zaamo and Zalrsc #384
Add Zaamo and Zalrsc #384
Conversation
|
@billmcspadden-riscv this spec was also recently ratified. Can this be merged? |
|
What is the official stance on A vs Za*? LLVM doesn’t believe that A implies Zalrsc or Zaamo, yet this PR says it does. |
|
The A extension comprises instructions provided by the Zaamo and Zalrsc extensions. The LLVM PR for this is open: llvm/llvm-project#77424 and this one is merged: llvm/llvm-project#78970 |
|
I think we merged a PR recently that moved the guards to be more in line with other files, so I think this PR needs to be rebased for that. Other than that I don't see any issues here. Presumably at some point we will have to change the |
|
Ideally PRs like the one the one to refactor the *aext.sail would have been done after applying the related PRs like a) for Zabha, b) Zacas, c) Zaamo, d) Zalrsc that have been queued for a while now. If these had been applied before the refactoring then the refactoring could have more comprehensively addressed these ratified extensions. I will try to get these four reworked/rebased and retested soon. |
|
Open PRs aren't actually a queue though. This one looks very easy to rebase in any case. |
Open PRs are not a queue but rewriting upstream for aesthetic reasons when there are queued PRs is not kind. |
It wasn't entirely aesthetic, and I don't think we should pause refactoring if any open PR conflicts, but in any case it wasn't my intention to be unkind or cause unnecessary rebasing (which is a right pain indeed!). Sorry about that. I also wasn't aware of this PR tbf - would be nice if Github could highlight conflicting PRs automatically! Anyway this LGTM and seems to be entirely uncontroversial so I'll merge it tomorrow if nobody has any objections... |
Specification: https://github.com/ved-rivos/riscv-zaamo-zalrsc