[Arm-netbook] about Risc-V and Power,

[zap]

>>> like any trademark, if you make no mention of the trademark, or any
>>> claims of "compliance", you're probably ok.
>>>
>>> from the time i worked on samba-tng, you can claim *compatibility*
>>> with something that is a pun or the *inversion* of a trademark.
>>> "arcfour-compatible" rather than "RC4 compliant".
>>>
>>> etnaviv.
>>>
>>> v-sirc.
>>>
>>> if you say "v-sirc compatible" and you're ok.
>> So to be clear, is it because it could be very dangerous to work on
>> risc-v without their help.
> no, not at all.  there's no need for "help".  and it's not "dangerous", either.
>
> * RISC-V is Trademarked.
> * therefore if you want to use the Trademark, you *must* respect the
> requirements set by the Trademark Holder.
> * if you do not want to use the Trademark in connection with your
> product, you do *NOT* have to meet the requirements.
>
> there is no "danger" here, nor a "need for help".
>
> in addition:
>
> * if the Trademark Holder acts in a persistently UNREASONABLE WAY,
> they LOSE the Trademark.
>
hmm... okay. I must've gotten confused then. I will wait to see your
plans and whether you plan to make your own risc-v or openpower
processor then.

I wish you the best on this,
>>>> And, OpenPower can be made more secure and lightweight then Risc-V.
>>> that's very difficult to say.  you start having to delve into what
>>> "secure" means at both the architectural, ISA *and* design level.
>>> "lightweight" is much easier to compare however would still take a
>>> significant amount of time.
>>>
>>>
>> Well said then. Lightweight is what I concern over more to be fair. I am
>> sure they are both equally or close to equally secure though - the
>> meltdown spectre crap. ;)
> that's a micro-architectural design decision, not a fault of the ISA itself.

Oh, okay. I wonder how much the softcore's use in watts.


https://openpowerfoundation.org/openpower-summit-north-america-2019-introducing-the-microwatt-fpga-soft-cpu-core/