* Preserving the underlying scalar execution dependencies as if the
for-loop had been expanded as actual scalar instructions
(termed "preserving Program Order")
+* Specifically designed to be Precise-Interruptible at all times
+ (many Vector ISAs have operations which, due to higher internal
+ accuracy or other complexity, must be effectively atomic only for
+ the full Vector operation's duration, adversely affecting interrupt
+ response latency, or be abandoned and started again)
* Augments ("tags") existing instructions, providing Vectorisation
"context" rather than adding new instructions.
* Strictly does not interfere with or alter the non-Scalable Power ISA
AVX-128 and AVX-256 which in turn critically rely on the rest of
x86, for a grand total of well over 10,000 instructions.
* RISV-V RVV: 192 instructions, prerequisite 96 Scalar RV64GC instructions
-* SVP64: **five** instructions, 24-bit prefixing of
+* SVP64: **six** instructions, two of which are in the same space
+ (svshape, svshape2), with 24-bit prefixing of
prerequisite SFS (150) or
- SFFS (214) Compliancy Subsets
+ SFFS (214) Compliancy Subsets.
+ **There are no dedicated Vector instructions, only Scalar-prefixed**.
+
+Comparative Basic Design Principle:
+
+* ARM NEON and VSX: PackedSIMD. No instruction-overloaded meaning
+ (every instruction is unique for a given register bitwidth,
+ guaranteeing binary interoperability)
+* Intel AVX-512 (and below): Hybrid Packed-Predicated SIMD with no
+ instruction-overloading, guaranteeing binary interoperability
+ but at the same time penalising the ISA with runaway
+ opcode proliferation.
+* ARM SVE/SVE2: Hybrid Packed-Predicated SIMD with instruction-overloading
+ that destroys binary interoperability. This is hidden behind the
+ misuse of the word "Scalable" and is **permitted under License**
+ by "Silicon Partners".
+* RISC-V RVV: Cray-style Scalable Vector but with instruction-overloading
+ **permitted by the specification** that destroys binary interoperability.
+* SVP64: Cray-style Scalable Vector with no instruction-overloaded
+ meanings. The regfile numbers and bitwidths shall **not** change
+ in a future revision (for the same instruction encoding):
+ "Silicon Partner" Scaling is prohibited,
+ in order to guarantee binary interoperability. Future revisions
+ of SVP64 may extend VSX instructions to achieve larger regfiles, and
+ non-interoperability on the same will likewise be prohibited.
SV comprises several [[sv/compliancy_levels]] suited to Embedded, Energy
efficient High-Performance Compute, Distributed Computing and Advanced
or are not immediately apparent despite the RISC paradigm
* [[opcode_regs_deduped]] autogenerated table of SVP64 decoder augmentation
* [[sv/sprs]] SPRs
+* [[sv/rfc]] RFCs to the [OPF ISA WG](https://openpower.foundation/isarfc/)
SVP64 "Modes":
Vertical-First Mode and also providing traditional "Vector Iota"
capability.
-*Please note: there are only five instructions in the whole of SV.
+*Please note: there are only six instructions in the whole of SV.
Beyond this point are additional **Scalar** instructions related to
specific workloads that have nothing to do with the SV Specification*
+# Stability Guarantees in Simple-V
+
+Providing long-term stability in an ISA is extremely challenging
+but critically important.
+It requires certain guarantees to be provided.
+
+* Firstly: that instructions will never be ambiguously-defined.
+* Secondly, that no instruction shall change meaning to produce
+ different results on different hardware (present or future)
+* Thirdly, that implementors are not permitted to either add
+ arbitrary features nor implement features in an incompatible
+ way. *(Performance may differ, but differing results are
+ not permitted)*.
+* Fourthly, that any part of Simple-V not implemented by
+ a lower Compliancy Level is *required* to raise an illegal
+ instruction trap (allowing soft-emulation).
+* Fifthly, that any `UNDEFINED` behaviour for practical implementation
+ reasons is clearly documented for both programmers and hardware
+ implementors.
+
+In particular, given the strong recent emphasis and interest in
+"Scalable Vector" ISAs, it is most unfortunate that both ARM SVE
+and RISC-V RVV permit the exact same instruction to produce
+different results on different hardware depending on a
+"Silicon Partner" hardware choice. This choice catastrophically
+and irrevocably causes binary non-interoperability *despite being
+a "feature"*. Explained in <https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HNEm8zmkjBU>
+
+It is therefore *guaranteed* that extensions to the register file
+width and quantity in Simple-V shall only be made in future by
+explicit means, ensuring binary compatibility.
+
+
# Optional Scalar instructions
**Additional Instructions for specific purposes (not SVP64)**
AVX-512 and SVE2 truly "Scalable".* [[sv/comparison_table]] in tabular
form.
-# Major opcodes summary
+# Major opcodes summary <a name="major_op_summary"> </a>
-Simple-V itself only requires five instructions with 6-bit Minor XO
+Simple-V itself only requires six instructions with 6-bit Minor XO
(bits 26-31), and the SVP64 Prefix Encoding requires
25% space of the EXT001 Major Opcode.
There are **no** Vector Instructions and consequently **no further
is considerable concern that because there is not yet any two-way
day-to-day communication established with the OPF ISA WG, we have
no idea if any of these are conflicting with future plans by any OPF
-Members. **The External ISA WG RFC Process is yet to be ratified
-and Libre-SOC may not join the OPF as an entity because it does
+Members. **The External ISA WG RFC Process has now been ratified
+but Libre-SOC may not join the OPF as an entity because it does
not exist except in name. Even if it existed it would be a conflict
of interest to join the OPF, due to our funding remit from NLnet**.
We therefore proceed on the basis of making public the intention to
requiring two Major opcodes this would come to a grand total of 3 precious
Major opcodes. On balance, then, sacrificing 25% of EXT001 is the "least
difficult" choice.
+Alternative locations for SVP64
+Prefixing include EXT006 and EXT017, with EXT006 being most favourable
+as there is room for future expansion.
Note also that EXT022, the Official Architectural Sandbox area
available for "Custom non-approved purposes" according to the Power
ISA Spec,
is under severe design pressure as it is insufficient to hold
the full extent of the instruction additions required to create
-a Hybrid 3D CPU-VPU-GPU. Akthough the wording of the Power ISA
+a Hybrid 3D CPU-VPU-GPU. Although the wording of the Power ISA
Specification leaves open the *possibility* of not needing to
propose ISA Extensions to the ISA WG, it is clear that EXT022
is an inappropriate location for a large high-profile Extension
therefore be made to work with the OPF ISA WG to
submit SVP64 via the External RFC Process.
-**Whilst SVP64 is only 5 instructions
+**Whilst SVP64 is only 6 instructions
the heavy focus on VSX for the past 12 years has left the SFFS Level
anaemic and out-of-date compared to ARM and x86.**
This is very much
projects / libreriscv.git / blobdiff