News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Report: ARM is for sale and Nvidia’s interested, Apple isn’t. Parent comment

Re:Report: ARM is for sale and Nvidia’s interested, Apple isn’t by klelatti on Thursday July 23, 2020 @06:26PM (#23933293)
Isn't the point though that a lot of the enthusiasm around RISC-V is that it's 'free' and that's no longer the case if you're using a proprietary extension. Plus you're looking at much greater possible fragmentation than can happen with ARM?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Report: ARM is for sale and Nvidia’s interested, Apple isn’t by jasonwatkinspdx on Thursday July 23, 2020 @07:34PM (#23934001)
The big difference is RISC-V has been designed to handle that situation from the start. That's why the ISA is modular.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Report: ARM is for sale and Nvidia’s interested, Apple isn’t by thu2111 on Friday July 24, 2020 @03:15AM (#23936636)
RISC-V is modular in the same way Windows or x86 is. Yeah, you can break up opcodes into groups and say there's some kind of probe to find out what groups are present. If your app needs that module then you're out of luck - it needs a different chip. This is nothing special and I don't see why it'd change anything fundamentally, competition wise.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Report: ARM is for sale and Nvidia’s interested, Apple isn’t by pjmlp on Friday July 24, 2020 @12:33AM (#23935759)
There's is no modularity when my code requires a specific RISC-V model from vendor X.
[ Parent | on HN ]