From fa64d0991d0950cedf78c1bc34e5e4d9b2b24713 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2018 16:20:13 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] clarify --- isa_conflict_resolution.mdwn | 11 ++++++----- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/isa_conflict_resolution.mdwn b/isa_conflict_resolution.mdwn index d09b0c7c9..267e43933 100644 --- a/isa_conflict_resolution.mdwn +++ b/isa_conflict_resolution.mdwn @@ -552,7 +552,8 @@ So to summarise: cannot take a back seat. If it does, clear historical precedent shows 100% what the outcome will be (1). * Making the mvendorid and marchid CSRs WARL solves the problem in a - minimal to zero-disruptive fashion. + minimal to zero-disruptive backwards-compatible fashion that provides + indefinite transparent *forwards*-compatibility. * The retro-fitting cost onto existing implementations (even though the specification has not been finalised) is zero to negligeable (only changes to words in the specification required at this time: @@ -567,10 +568,10 @@ So to summarise: * Compliance Testing is straightforward and allows vendors to seek and obtain *multiple* Compliance Certificates with past, present and future variants of the RISC-V Standard (in the exact same processor, - simultaneously), in order to support legacy customers and provide - same customers with a way to avoid "impossible-to-make" decisions that - throw out ultra-expensive multi-decade proprietary legacy software at - the same as the (legacy) hardware. + simultaneously), in order to support end-customer legacy scenarios and + provide the same with a way to avoid "impossible-to-make" decisions that + throw out ultra-costly multi-decade-investment in proprietary legacy + software at the same as the (legacy) hardware. ------- -- 2.30.2