Re: [isa-dev] Re: UNIX-Class Platform Specification Working Group

[Christoph Hellwig <Christoph.Hellwig@wdc.com>]

On Fri, 2019-04-05 at 08:43 -0700, Palmer Dabbelt wrote:
> Sorry for the delay, but it appears we now have a mailing list set
> up!  I managed to announce the group right in the middle of the
> workspace -> groups.io transition, which means we're the first group
> to try out the new infrastructure.  As a result there may be some
> wrinkles, but at least a handful of us can get into the group so with
> any luck it'll work for anyone else.
> 
> You should be able to join here: 
> https://lists.risc-v.org/g/tech-unixplatformspec/topics .  Just like
> the other RISC-V specs, you'll need to be a member of the RISC-V
> foundation to contribute to the platform specification -- sorry if
> there was some confusion in my original email.

So in the past the way to join was through workspace.riscv.org - but
login in there just returns an internal server error.  Has lists.risc-
v.org replaced the above infrastructure or is it in addition?

> 
> On Tue, Apr 2, 2019 at 9:50 AM Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@sifive.com>
> wrote:
> > Atish and I have approval from the RISC-V technical committee and
> > board to 
> > start a group to manage the UNIX-class platform specification. 
> > This working 
> > group will start by defining a subset of this platform
> > specification that both 
> > allows compatibility with existing implementations and
> > extensibility for the 
> > future needs.  The contents of this first platform specification
> > will include:
> > 
> > * A versioning scheme for future versions of the UNIX-class
> > platform 
> >   specification.
> > * A specification for a platform-level interrupt controller that is
> > compatible 
> >   with existing implementations of SiFive's PLIC.
> > * A specification for a standard SBI that is compatible with the
> > current 
> >   implementation in Linux as well being extensible for future
> > needs.
> > * An SBI extension for CPU power management.
> > * A specification of the interface between a bootloader and
> > supervisor-mode 
> >   software.
> > 
> > Since this working group mostly consists of standardizing existing 
> > implementations, I hope it can progress quickly.  As such, I'd like
> > to set a 
> > 6-month deadline between when the working group is started (ie,
> > today) and when 
> > a specification enters the 45-day review period.
_______________________________________________
linux-riscv mailing list
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv