2025-05-28 TSC Overflow Meeting
Date
May 28, 2025
Disclosures
Participants
Agenda
PoWs
Operations
1 - On a scale of 0–10, how confident are you that the new RISC-V governance policies support transparent, community-driven decision-making?
2 - What specific aspects of the new policies do you feel work well? (open text)
3 - What areas of the new policies do you think need improvement or clarification? (open text)
4 - Were the voting rights and participation rules clearly explained and fair in your opinion?
a) Very Clear and Fair
b) Somewhat Clear
c) Confusing or Unfair
d) I do not understand it
5 - What would you suggest we change or add to improve how working groups and technical committees operate under this policy? (open text)Presentations
Title | Presenter | File | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
|
|
|
| 2 |
|
|
|
Notes & Action Items
Meeting transcript and video: link
Summary
Introductory Remarks
Jeff announced that meeting minutes would not be voted on during this session and that the agenda would focus on presentations and proposals for work. The meeting started with disclosures.
Automotive SIG Proposal of Work
Thomas presented a proposal for the Automotive SIG, aiming to create and maintain a list of requirements for RISC-V to address the automotive market, increase confidence in RISC-V for automotive applications, and promote its adoption. The group discussed collaboration with various committees and task groups, including functional safety, trusted computing, and real-time virtualization. They agreed to focus on evaluating the current status of RISC-V specifications for automotive applications and producing a white paper or roadmap. The SIG aims to serve as an entry point for the automotive industry to engage with RISC-V experts and share requirements and best practices.
The group discussed the Automotive SIG's reboot and its alignment with existing frameworks, particularly regarding microcontrollers and profiles. Thomas explained that automotive platforms may require multiple profiles due to varying device applications and capabilities, and the team agreed to postpone final decisions until after completing a gap analysis or white paper. The group confirmed that the Governing Committee for this initiative would be the Technology HC, and Philipp and Greg agreed that the process should follow standard member review procedures before moving to TSC approval.
Server SOC Specification Enhancement Proposal
Ved and the SOC Infrastructure HC proposed developing a follow-on specification to augment the existing Server SOC specification, incorporating new rules to address industry advancements and RBI developments. The group aims to create a test specification, test infrastructure, and test suite to verify compliance with the updated rules, while ensuring compatibility with existing implementations. They plan to collaborate with other technical groups and have sponsorship from premier and strategic members. The versioning strategy was discussed, with a focus on maintaining compatibility with existing products while allowing for optional, non-mandatory additions in the new specification.
J Extension TG to SIG Conversion
The meeting discussed converting the J Extension Technical Group (TG) into a Special Interest Group (SIG). Martin and Adam, the current chair and vice chair of the J Extension TG, presented the proposal, highlighting the group's focus on architectural support for managed languages like Java, JavaScript, C#, Python, and WebAssembly. They explained the need for hardware support to improve garbage collection, dynamic code generation, and other features unique to managed runtimes. The group plans to continue collaborating with other TGs like Memory Tagging and Hardware Fault Isolation (HFI) to develop technical reports, gap analyses, and benchmarks. It was suggested that the SIG's name be changed to something more appropriate, such as "Dynamic Language SIG," to reflect its scope better.
The group discussed the status of a old task group's work and agreed to move forward with it after making some updates. They decided to create a work plan to focus on specific priorities, starting with a gap analysis document.
Operational Updates
The team addressed the need for a calendar-like system to track meetings by correspondence. Any additional feedback from the TSC on the process would be appreciated.
They discussed plans for a community feedback survey on policy implementation. It was concluded that more planning is needed and agreed to bring this back to the TSC with a refined plan and addressing the issues raised.
Finally, they reviewed the progress of a TSC priority survey, which had received 43 responses so far, and encouraged more participation from strategic members.
Detailed Notes
PoW Automotive SIG
Discussion
We should consider Quintauris a Supporting Organization now that they are a member.
Need both AIA and Fast Interrupts (CLIC) based on use case in implementation.
Minor corrections: AIA TG is complete. Server SOC is a TG which is being completed.
How do Automotive and Functional Safety relate?
Answer: Similar interests in standards and shared interest. Working with both groups.What are the goals for 2025?
Answer: would like a whitepaper to evaluate the current specs to cover Automotive.
Suggestion: can we turn this into gap analysis and build a roadmap?Suggestion that we add additional goal of using this SIG to create connections for bringing all groups together for Automotive.
What are the focus areas?
Answer: looking at all areas.Do the objectives include a Profile?
Answer: not an intent at this time. Goal would be use existing profiles if possible, existing and proposed. More likely will need a platform, not a profile based on Summit EU discussions.
Next Steps
Approved by chairs for member review
PoW Server SOC II TG
Discussion
Suggestion rewording the “revise the” spec to suggest updates without impacting previous ratification.
Need to list the Security HC as a collaborator.
Expect version 1.1 items of Server SOC Specification to be optional and not mandated. May need to revisit.
Next Steps
Approved by chairs for member review
J Extension SIG
Discussion
HFI is Hardware Fault Isolation which covers some similar use cases with original P-extension.
Recommend changing name to Dynamic Language SIG or something like it because J Extension is incorrect.
What is work plan for this year?
Answer: starting gap analysis which will be prioritized, and then selection 1-2 things on which to focus.Are there new runtimes which need to be considered?
Answer: Perhaps. Will add this to the gap analysis input items.
Next Steps
Approve by chairs for member review after a few minor updates.
Meeting by Correspondence
Directions appear to be solidifying (link)
One item to consider: how do we “publish” these meetings, like a calendar would? Proposed solution is a wiki page.
Need to take a more operation-focused approach to the questions.