generated from riscv/docs-spec-template
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 29
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Introduce GCTYPE to obtain the capability type #337
Merged
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
@davidchisnall @nwf I haven't yet updated the semantics of sealing but hopefully you agree this is a correct first step. |
arichardson
commented
Aug 1, 2024
arichardson
commented
Aug 1, 2024
nwf-msr
approved these changes
Aug 16, 2024
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
tariqkurd-repo
approved these changes
Aug 23, 2024
While the base CHERI specification only has unsealed capabilities and one type of sentry capability, other extensions (e.g. CherIoT) that will build upon the base CHERI-RISC-V standard have additional types of capabilities. Defining the specification in terms of object types instead of just having unsealed and sentry is one important step towards allowing CherIoT to be a RV32E extension on top of the base standard. See https://lists.riscv.org/g/tech-tg-cheri/message/6
tariqkurd-repo
pushed a commit
to tariqkurd-repo/riscv-cheri
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 9, 2024
While the base CHERI specification only has unsealed capabilities and one type of sentry capability, other extensions (e.g. CherIoT) that will build upon the base CHERI-RISC-V standard have additional types of capabilities. Defining the specification in terms of object types instead of just having unsealed and sentry is one important step towards allowing CherIoT to be a RV32E extension on top of the base standard. See https://lists.riscv.org/g/tech-tg-cheri/message/6
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
While the base CHERI specification only has unsealed capabilities and one type of sentry capability, other extensions (e.g. CherIoT) that will build upon the base CHERI-RISC-V standard have additional types of capabilities. Defining the specification in terms of object types instead of just having unsealed and sentry is one important step towards allowing CherIoT to be a RV32E extension on top of the base standard.
See https://lists.riscv.org/g/tech-tg-cheri/message/6