From: Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2018 02:13:42 +0000 (+0100) Subject: add encoding explanation X-Git-Tag: convert-csv-opcode-to-binary~5235 X-Git-Url: https://git.libre-soc.org/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=6c351551805df9cad8314dc981d7a76d3a44c917;p=libreriscv.git add encoding explanation --- diff --git a/isa_conflict_resolution.mdwn b/isa_conflict_resolution.mdwn index b0a14fcde..8125aa392 100644 --- a/isa_conflict_resolution.mdwn +++ b/isa_conflict_resolution.mdwn @@ -564,6 +564,21 @@ The following conversation exerpts are taken from the ISA-dev discussion > non-standard extensions provided it does not claim to implement that > standard extension. +## (6) Clarification of difference between assembler and encodings + +> > The extensible assembler database I proposed assumes that each processor +> > will have *one* and *only* one set of recognized instructions.  (The "hidden +> > prefix" is the immutable vendor/arch/impl tuple in my proposals.)  +> +>  ah this is an extremely important thing to clarify, the difference +> between the recognised instruction assembly mnemonic (which must be +> globally world-wide accepted as canonical) and the binary-level encodings +> of that mnemonic used different vendor implementations which will most +> definitely *not* be unique but require "registration" in the form of +> atomic acceptance as a patch by the FSF to gcc and binutils [and other +> compiler tools]. + + # References *