[Arm-netbook] riscv-basics.com

[David Boddie]

This site popped up on the radar for me this morning.

It's currently down - perhaps there was a public backlash, the server
overheated, or something - but at least the Internet Archive still has a
copy:

https://web.archive.org/web/20180710130206/https://riscv-basics.com/

Time to start a riscv-netbook mailing list, perhaps? ;-)

David

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large att

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

Post by David Boddie
This site popped up on the radar for me this morning.

yeah. interestingly the bullet-points 3 and 5 are *actuallly
legitimate concerns*. the RISC-V Foundation is over-controlled by UCB
Berkeley, via a structure that is similar to the failed Google Project
Ara ("it's open as long as you sign our secret agreement and don't
publish information we don't want you to").

Post by David Boddie
It's currently down - perhaps there was a public backlash, the server
overheated, or something - but at least the Internet Archive still has a
https://web.archive.org/web/20180710130206/https://riscv-basics.com/
Time to start a riscv-netbook mailing list, perhaps? ;-)

:)

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send lar

[Richard Wilbur]

Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
interestingly the bullet-points 3 and 5 are *actuallly
legitimate concerns*. the RISC-V Foundation is over-controlled by UCB
Berkeley,[0] via a structure that is similar to the failed Google Project
Ara ("it's open as long as you sign our secret agreement and don't
publish information we don't want you to").

Are you referring to "Design Assurance"(as 3) and "Security"(as 5)?

Seems like an advertisement specifically against risc-v by and for ARM.

I'm sorry to hear about those terms on a project with any pretensions of being "open".

Notes:
[0] UCB stands for "University of California at Berkeley" so the intermediate form is normally "UC Berkeley".
_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
S

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 10:11 PM, Richard Wilbur

Post by Richard Wilbur

Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
interestingly the bullet-points 3 and 5 are *actuallly
legitimate concerns*. the RISC-V Foundation is over-controlled by UCB
Berkeley,[0] via a structure that is similar to the failed Google Project
Ara ("it's open as long as you sign our secret agreement and don't
publish information we don't want you to").

Are you referring to "Design Assurance"(as 3) and "Security"(as 5)?

fragmentation risk and cost.

Post by Richard Wilbur
Seems like an advertisement specifically against risc-v by and for ARM.

indeed... one that that has been well-researched and partly has
merit. other aspects definitely do not.

Post by Richard Wilbur
I'm sorry to hear about those terms on a project with any pretensions of being "open".

i know. i was... extremely optimistic and hopeful when i started
hearing about RISC-V, particularly that it was intended to solve mny
of the issues and mistakes made in RISC design over the past 30+
years.

however that quickly turned to shock, then puzzlement, and now i'm
wondering where to go from here, as i learned over time that the UC B
team behind RISC-V, although they have achieved absolutely fantastic
things, are... unable to let go of control of the development process,
shall we say.

it comes down basically to them being technically brilliant.
sufficiently brilliant that they are unable to appreciate that other
people may have very good reasons for wanting to do something quite
differently from how they envisaged it should be done.

there are many many examples from a huge range of levels of needs,
from a huge range of diverse contributors. the MIT Team for example,
who want to do research into formally-secure processors,
*specifically* require "Total Store Order" memory semantics. as in,
when a memory access (load or store) is requested, the order is
ABSOLUTELY guaranteed to be preserved (and speed and cacheing and
out-of-order execution can go take a running jump).

however.... the RISC-V memory model was *specifically* designed by UC
B with some *specific* design criteria and *specific* optimisations
and a lot of research.... consequently MIT had to fight tooth and nail
just to get a single one-page chapter put into the specification.

anyway.

i'll be in Chennai next week, i'm giving a talk on the Libre RISC-V SoC.

l.

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments t

[David Niklas]

On Wed, 11 Jul 2018 01:26:35 +0100

Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 10:11 PM, Richard Wilbur

Post by Richard Wilbur

On Jul 10, 2018, at 13:37, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
*actuallly legitimate concerns*. the RISC-V Foundation is
over-controlled by UCB Berkeley,[0] via a structure that is similar
to the failed Google Project Ara ("it's open as long as you sign our
secret agreement and don't publish information we don't want you
to").

Are you referring to "Design Assurance"(as 3) and "Security"(as 5)?

fragmentation risk and cost.

Post by Richard Wilbur
Seems like an advertisement specifically against risc-v by and for ARM.

indeed... one that that has been well-researched and partly has
merit. other aspects definitely do not.

Post by Richard Wilbur
I'm sorry to hear about those terms on a project with any pretensions of being "open".

i know. i was... extremely optimistic and hopeful when i started
hearing about RISC-V, particularly that it was intended to solve mny
of the issues and mistakes made in RISC design over the past 30+
years.
however that quickly turned to shock, then puzzlement, and now i'm
wondering where to go from here, as i learned over time that the UC B
team behind RISC-V, although they have achieved absolutely fantastic
things, are... unable to let go of control of the development process,
shall we say.
it comes down basically to them being technically brilliant.
sufficiently brilliant that they are unable to appreciate that other
people may have very good reasons for wanting to do something quite
differently from how they envisaged it should be done.

<snip>

I thought that riscv was based on "prior art" such that any license that
restricts it would be untenable.

Assuming that faith in riscv is misplaced, what about Epiphany? The
Parallela (FPGA) board in no longer developed, but the processor is still
an OSS arch, right?

Thanks

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to ar

[Jean Flamelle]

Misplaced might be an over-exaggeration.

This issue seems virtually identical to the issues with SystemD.
The establishment wants to do their own thing, after getting bored of
their own principles, eventually someone needs to build a stable fork
and all will return to normal eventually, so long as there are
individuals that still care and still act like they care.

Part of getting bored of one's own principles is getting burnt out.
That happened with pulseaudio and that happened with fastbooting SystemD.

Really this feels normal and ''probably'' healthy.
Even whole organizations can burn out.
I guess this is how to cope.

Perhaps, Luke, this aggression you/many perceive from these
individuals is less arrogance and more a reaction to overwhelming
pressure, don't ya think now that I say? : D

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send l

[David Niklas]

Not to be an annoyance, but you seem to have been so busy that you missed
my reply and I do think it was important.

Thanks.

On Fri, 13 Jul 2018 09:18:46 -0400

Post by David Niklas
On Wed, 11 Jul 2018 01:26:35 +0100

Post by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 10:11 PM, Richard Wilbur

Post by Richard Wilbur

On Jul 10, 2018, at 13:37, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton
*actuallly legitimate concerns*. the RISC-V Foundation is
over-controlled by UCB Berkeley,[0] via a structure that is similar
to the failed Google Project Ara ("it's open as long as you sign
our secret agreement and don't publish information we don't want
you to").

Are you referring to "Design Assurance"(as 3) and "Security"(as 5)?

fragmentation risk and cost.

Post by Richard Wilbur
Seems like an advertisement specifically against risc-v by and for ARM.

indeed... one that that has been well-researched and partly has
merit. other aspects definitely do not.

Post by Richard Wilbur
I'm sorry to hear about those terms on a project with any
pretensions of being "open".

i know. i was... extremely optimistic and hopeful when i started
hearing about RISC-V, particularly that it was intended to solve mny
of the issues and mistakes made in RISC design over the past 30+
years.
however that quickly turned to shock, then puzzlement, and now i'm
wondering where to go from here, as i learned over time that the UC B
team behind RISC-V, although they have achieved absolutely fantastic
things, are... unable to let go of control of the development process,
shall we say.
it comes down basically to them being technically brilliant.
sufficiently brilliant that they are unable to appreciate that other
people may have very good reasons for wanting to do something quite
differently from how they envisaged it should be done.

<snip>
I thought that riscv was based on "prior art" such that any license that
restricts it would be untenable.
Assuming that faith in riscv is misplaced, what about Epiphany? The
Parallela (FPGA) board in no longer developed, but the processor is
still an OSS arch, right?
Thanks

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-***@files.p

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

Post by David Niklas
Not to be an annoyance, but you seem to have been so busy that you missed
my reply and I do think it was important.

Yes. Very limited time in chennai. Have to focus

[Elena ``of Valhalla'']

Post by David Boddie
It's currently down - perhaps there was a public backlash, the server
overheated, or something

it has been taken down by arm themselves after their own staff
complained:

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/07/10/arm_riscv_website/

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

---
crowd-funded eco-conscious hardware: https://www.crowdsupply.com/eoma68


On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 11:27 AM, Elena ``of Valhalla''

Post by Elena ``of Valhalla''

Post by David Boddie
It's currently down - perhaps there was a public backlash, the server
overheated, or something

it has been taken down by arm themselves after their own staff
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/07/10/arm_riscv_website/

thanks for the tip, elena. there's another one on phoronix -
https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=ARM-RISC-V-Facts

i couldn't help but put this in:

https://slashdot.org/submission/8382672/arms-own-employees-complain-about-anti-riscv-website

i'm kinda surprised that there's not been a slashdot article yet
about this, so if you feel it should be on the front page do vote it
up.

l.

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large attachments to arm-***@files.phco

[Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton]

https://tech.slashdot.org/story/18/07/11/1958213/arms-own-employees-complain-about-anti-riscv-website#comments

_______________________________________________
arm-netbook mailing list arm-***@lists.phcomp.co.uk
http://lists.phcomp.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/arm-netbook
Send large att