You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I am looking into this project in the context of making an arguably somewhat esoteric "fantasy console" that tries as hard as possible to be a realistic PSX-style game console and would run on an emulated RISC-V core w/ memory mapped peripherals, etc, and wanted to avoid having to write the core emulator myself.
Ideally, I would like to opt for a very minimal rv32em instruction set, which is what I have built my GCC toolchain to target. Of course a full rv32ima core would run such instructions just fine, but I'd like to restrict the allowed registers & instruction set for added challenge. Is there a good way for me to accomplish this, should I just fork and trim out what I don't need, etc.?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Actually, reading through the source, maybe it would be enough for me to just define my own MINIRV32_CUSTOM_INTERNALS? So that perhaps I could write a replacement REG/REGSET that just masks the register number to fit the x0-x15 range?
That still leaves atomics but honestly I'm not sure how much I care about restricting those.
Hello!
I am looking into this project in the context of making an arguably somewhat esoteric "fantasy console" that tries as hard as possible to be a realistic PSX-style game console and would run on an emulated RISC-V core w/ memory mapped peripherals, etc, and wanted to avoid having to write the core emulator myself.
Ideally, I would like to opt for a very minimal rv32em instruction set, which is what I have built my GCC toolchain to target. Of course a full rv32ima core would run such instructions just fine, but I'd like to restrict the allowed registers & instruction set for added challenge. Is there a good way for me to accomplish this, should I just fork and trim out what I don't need, etc.?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: