[HN Gopher] XiangShan - Open-source high performance RISC-V proc...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       XiangShan - Open-source high performance RISC-V processor
        
       Author : gjvc
       Score  : 255 points
       Date   : 2025-01-02 17:08 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (github.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
        
       | fithisux wrote:
       | Bravo guys! Tremendous piece of work.
        
       | paulsutter wrote:
       | It important to be aware of the significant progress that China
       | is making in AI, robotics, and processors, and admirable that
       | they are open sourcing so much of it.
       | 
       | It's great work and an inspiration
        
         | nine_k wrote:
         | Quite possibly the open-sourcing is a part of the success
         | story. The Chinese culture is built around incessant
         | reproducing and gradual improvement, which dates back at least
         | to the times of Confucius. Some think it's mindless
         | copycatting, but it's more about learning deeply and then
         | standing on others' shoulders. It's the "fork this" attitude
         | that meshes quite well with open source, but is understandably
         | infuriating for IP-licensing / patents crowd.
         | 
         | This doesn't mean that the openness extends easily to those
         | outside China, its culture, and especially its language though.
        
           | bpfrh wrote:
           | I don't see that much opensource coming from china.
           | 
           | For example the popular arm rockchip offerings are so bad at
           | contributing to mainline linux or even sharing documentation
           | that the single person supporting them dropped it due to lack
           | of fund and being unable to get any contact to share
           | documentation.
           | 
           | IMHO, chinese opensource does at best the same thing many
           | western companies do:
           | 
           | Opensource the things that are not you secret sauce/income,
           | or things which would benefit you if people adopt them.
           | 
           | With the added caveat that china in generally is notorious
           | for not abiding by patent laws and copying.
        
             | wakawaka28 wrote:
             | Indeed, the Chinese often violate open source licenses and
             | outright steal proprietary code from non-Chinese companies.
        
             | holoduke wrote:
             | Huggingface rings a bell? 80% is coming from chinese
             | reaearch.
        
             | nine_k wrote:
             | I suspect that Rockchip has better documentation in
             | Chinese, which may be not easy to locate if you're not
             | fluent in Chinese and are not inside China.
             | 
             | Upstreaming the kernel support has never been a breeze for
             | any ARM designs, IIRC. But the custom kernels are GPL [1],
             | aren't they?
             | 
             | [1]:https://github.com/radxa/rockchip-bsp
        
             | sitkack wrote:
             | > I don't see that much opensource coming from china.
             | 
             | What you don't look for you don't see. I see a huge
             | contribution in OSS from contributors based in China.
        
             | miki123211 wrote:
             | I think many companies in China have a different
             | relationship with IP. They realize that people copy from
             | each other, they will gladly copy from others and expect
             | them to do the same, yet they realize that being hard-to-
             | copy gives them a competitive advantage.
             | 
             | In the west, being hard-to-copy often just means slapping a
             | proprietary license on your software and not worrying about
             | much else. THe "source available" model is a prime example,
             | the software is trivial to copy in theory, but everybody
             | knows there would be legal consequences, so nobody serious
             | actually does it.
             | 
             | In China, this doesn't work, so you have to obfuscate your
             | code, build anti-reverse-engineering protections etc. This
             | is similar to how the gaming market works in the west.
             | 
             | There are plenty of great writeups on reverse-engineering
             | Chinese apps and hardware, and their reverse-engineering
             | protections are often far more elaborate than what those
             | same apps would have if made by western companies.
        
             | pantalaimon wrote:
             | Loongson did pretty well in getting Loongarch64 upstreamed
             | in all kinds of open source projects
        
           | Barrin92 wrote:
           | >The Chinese culture is built around incessant reproducing
           | and gradual improvement
           | 
           | all successful cultures are, they're just divided on whether
           | they admit it or not. Germany was late to industrialization
           | and a lot of our businesses went to Britain under the
           | pretense of doing business and copied chemical plant factory
           | layouts one-to-one, but we like the "we're the country of
           | engineers and thinkers" story much better than "we were a bit
           | slow and ripped the British and French off".
           | 
           | The Chinese just don't pretend. I've spent a lot of time in
           | China and around FB's attempted Snapchat acquisition in tech
           | circles there used to be the joke that FB is the most Chinese
           | American company because of Zuckerberg's relentless copying.
           | The valley works the exact same way, they're just more likely
           | to pretend everything is the result of some boy genius making
           | it up.
        
           | cute_boi wrote:
           | I hope China don't follow all these IP/patents. They have
           | harmed more imo.
        
         | lenerdenator wrote:
         | Isn't RISC-V FOSS to begin with?
        
           | gdiamos wrote:
           | The instruction set is, not necessarily the implementation.
        
             | Arnavion wrote:
             | That said, an open ISA certainly invites people amenable to
             | open-sourcing their implementations, which is why more
             | exist for RISC-V than for x86 or ARM.
        
               | sitkack wrote:
               | If you try and make an OSS implementation of either, even
               | using parts of the ISA where all the patents have expired
               | and you will still get sued.
               | 
               | The purpose of RISC-V was to have a boring, unencumbered
               | ISA that everyone could freely implement. It _was_ a
               | patent play, not a technical advancement.
        
       | m3kw9 wrote:
       | What's the strategy in open sourcing this?
        
         | slongfield wrote:
         | They presented at HotChips 2024:
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_R0S6piLA0&t=2114s
         | 
         | There, one of the things they mentioned was that they were
         | hoping that RISC-V in general, and their cores in particular,
         | becomes a platform for academic research. That way, cutting-
         | edge things are shared in the open and the industry benefits
         | globally.
         | 
         | The optimistic view of this is that it's hoping for a better
         | future for all. The cynical view is that open source is much
         | harder to sanction/export control. The truth is probably
         | somewhere in the middle.
        
         | blackeyeblitzar wrote:
         | The strategy is to do PR for China, market for adoption (to
         | break chip duopoly), get contributions (free work), and build
         | momentum to a point where the tech is commoditized (so they can
         | be immune to sanctions).
        
           | cookiemonsieur wrote:
           | then that's a good strategy. It's about time the world takes
           | on western dominance.
        
         | szundi wrote:
         | Other motive could be to undermine western dominance in chip
         | design. You give away free a good enough thing that is
         | competing with your competitor's moat. If the gap is not that
         | significant this can ruin the business for your competitor.
         | 
         | You can see the same with Apple and all big tech funding
         | OpenStreetMap for example vs Google Maps. Even decreasing
         | income for the competitor is worth it strategically. Or Satya
         | Nadella saying in an interview that if ChatGPT just makes
         | Google's costs higher for search is a big win for Microsoft.
        
           | whatever1 wrote:
           | Yep. Once espressif gave us the esp32 with 50 cents each we
           | completely forgot about arm etc.
        
         | crvdgc wrote:
         | Realistically, it's probably the group inside the Chinese
         | Academy of Sciences wanting for a larger impact factor for
         | their review, similar to all other state sponsored researching
         | institutes.
        
         | jurschreuder wrote:
         | Universities always make things open source. I also make
         | everything open source that I make for the university.
         | 
         | It's because you cannot make money with it anyway and the
         | university often allows it, so then it's really good for your
         | CV.
         | 
         | In Europe there is also a lot of stuff open source, and I can
         | honestly say there is no plot by the government to destroy the
         | United States. I don't think Linux is a plan by the Swedish
         | government to destroy the USA.
         | 
         | Most Chinese people in my experience also don't really have any
         | country outside of China on their radar, unless they are in
         | some trading business. China is just so huge compared to for
         | example the US, they really live in their own bubble. It's not
         | something they think about on a monthly let alone daily basis
         | is my personal experience.
        
           | miki123211 wrote:
           | And if you want to do a commercial spin-off from your
           | university work, it might be easier to put it all out as
           | MIT/BSD/Apache and then start a completely independent
           | company than to deal with all the paperwork.
           | 
           | This makes life easier for competitors, so it's definitely a
           | tradeoff, but it's the right tradeoff in some circumstances.
        
             | PittleyDunkin wrote:
             | > This makes life easier for competitors,
             | 
             | I think this is greatly overstated. Generally it's just
             | sheer volume of capital and dedication to building a
             | business that dictates market advantage, not any given
             | persons' knowledge or know-how (though that's obviously
             | worth paying for if you have the capital). I'd argue the
             | primary reason why proprietary ownership of software exists
             | isn't to make life harder for competitors but rather to
             | make it harder for folks to figure out what they're
             | actually paying for and bypassing the fees to actually fix
             | (let alone improve) the software.
        
           | usrnm wrote:
           | > I don't think Linux is a plan by the Swedish government to
           | destroy the USA.
           | 
           | Linus comes from a family of ethnic Swedes, but he was born
           | and raised in Finland, the Swedish government had nothing to
           | do with it.
        
             | red-iron-pine wrote:
             | I thought he was of Lapplander extraction?
        
       | camel-cdr wrote:
       | If anyone wants to play arround with simulating it, here is a
       | Dockerfile I use:                   # Dockerfile         FROM
       | ubuntu:24.04              RUN apt-get update && apt-get install
       | -y build-essential clang libclang-dev llvm-dev cmake libspdlog-
       | dev vim git curl wget time default-jre default-jdk         RUN
       | git clone --recursive https://github.com/OpenXiangShan/xs-env
       | WORKDIR /xs-env         RUN sed 's/apt\S* install/\0
       | -y/g;s/source /. /g;s/sudo //g' -i ./*.sh         RUN . ./env.sh
       | && sed 's/\/master/\/master/g;s/$/; cd \/xs-env/g' -i ./update-
       | submodule.sh && ./update-submodule.sh                   RUN .
       | ./env.sh && ./setup-tools.sh         RUN . ./env.sh && .
       | ./install-verilator.sh         RUN . ./env.sh && sed 's/^git
       | submodule.*$//g;s/env.*$//g' -i ./setup.sh && . ./setup.sh
       | RUN . ./env.sh && make -C XiangShan init         RUN . ./env.sh
       | && cd DRAMsim3 && mkdir build && cd build && cmake -D COSIM=1 ..
       | && make -j 8         RUN . ./env.sh && make -C XiangShan emu
       | CONFIG=DefaultConfig WITH_DRAMSIM3=1 MFC=1 -j 8              RUN
       | . ./env.sh \             && sed
       | 's/unknown-//g;s/rv64gc/rv64gcv/g' -i $AM_HOME/am/arch/*.mk
       | $AM_HOME/am/arch/isa/*.mk \             && sed 's/define
       | MSTATUS_FS.*$/define MSTATUS_FS 0x6600/g' -i
       | $AM_HOME/am/src/*/isa/riscv/boot/*.S                   WORKDIR
       | nexus-am/apps/hello         RUN make ARCH=riscv64-xs
       | # $NOOP_HOME/build/emu --no-diff -i ./build/hello-riscv64-xs.bin
       | 2>/dev/null
       | 
       | Make sure you have 64GB of RAM. I only had 16GB, but allocating
       | additional 48GB of swap worked.
       | 
       | There are probably some redundant steps, but this worked for me
       | last time I tried.
        
         | ge96 wrote:
         | why so much ram?
        
           | chrsw wrote:
           | 64GB of RAM isn't that much for full chip simulation of a
           | "high performance" CPU.
        
             | ge96 wrote:
             | yeah I'm super ignorant here, wondering, say you simulated
             | this, could you run a VM OS against it? What kind of scale
             | it it, personal computer or server (i7/xeon)?
             | 
             | Or you just use it to compile programs against it?
             | 
             | edit: I did skim the readme, I saw verilog makes me think
             | FPGA
        
               | chrsw wrote:
               | You could simulate this on an FPGA platform, those aren't
               | going to be cheap to hold a large design. Usually by
               | running simulations on a PC you're just running very
               | specific test cases.
               | 
               | I've run CPU simulations on machines with 64GB of RAM
               | before and it took several hours just to get to single-
               | user shell in Linux. Different CPU design and computer,
               | but the point is it's not something you'd typically use
               | interactively.
        
               | ge96 wrote:
               | Interesting do it actually runs that's cool vs. a hyper
               | visor which idk the difference but yeah
        
               | brucehoult wrote:
               | If you're simulating a complex CPU's HDL in Verilator
               | then think in terms of single digit thousands of
               | instructions per second. Vs single digit billions of
               | instructions per second when it's made into an SoC.
               | 
               | i.e. on the order of a million times slower than the
               | final product.
               | 
               | On an FPGA you might get 20 to 50 million instructions
               | per second, only 100 times slower than the final SoC
               | product. But for a large modern OoO design you'll need an
               | FPGA costing $15000 (for a VCU118) or even more.
        
             | IshKebab wrote:
             | That's a pretty huge amount of RAM even for a high
             | performance core. The medium performance cores I've
             | simulated use more like 300MB.
             | 
             | I suspect it is the Scala compilation that requires all the
             | RAM rather Verilator or the simulator.
        
               | chrsw wrote:
               | Maybe, I've never used Scala before. But in my experience
               | simulations are way more resource intensive than
               | compilation.
        
             | sdbbp wrote:
             | That's the HDL, and not the inherent design complexity.
        
             | camel-cdr wrote:
             | The 64GB is for compilation. simulating does take almost no
             | RAM. I can have 12 seperate instances simulating at once
             | and take less than 2GB:
             | 
             | https://i.postimg.cc/XqnhcXX1/1-1.png
        
               | tormeh wrote:
               | Compiling the chip, right, not the code?
        
               | camel-cdr wrote:
               | yes
        
               | chrsw wrote:
               | Wow, it's surprising to me there's a huge difference and
               | in that direction. I always used to increasing resource
               | requirements for synthesis->P&R->logic simulation->full
               | chip simulation. I guess times have changed since I
               | worked on chip design.
        
       | luyu_wu wrote:
       | I posted a link to this project a few weeks ago as well! It's
       | really interesting to see an academic project like this one.
       | 
       | For people interested, there's bi-weekly blogs (some in English)
       | linked here: https://docs.xiangshan.cc/zh-cn/latest/blog/
        
       | omolobo wrote:
       | Free hardware is the dream. I want to replace the proprietary,
       | DRM-bloated CPU on my PC yesterday.
        
       | luyu_wu wrote:
       | Here is a commercial product using the older 'Nanhu' architecture
       | by XiangShan. Doesn't seem to be released yet, but interesting
       | nonetheless!
       | 
       | https://milkv.io/ja/ruyibook
        
       | mooreed wrote:
       | This project is the first that tickles my brain in the right
       | serendipitous ways; it merges topics of my recent interests.
       | 
       | However, after a VERY short perusal, I grew a giant sense of
       | empathy for non-native English speakers. The readme is gentle
       | enough to English speakers (aka: +95% English) no less I felt
       | like I muddled through renaming tokens in my mind as I went.
       | However, that quickly showed me two things.
       | 
       | 1. It reminds me why I never seem to finish classic Russian
       | literature... so often get lost in the introductory parade of
       | names that are a cache miss for my usual set of names.
       | 
       | 2. This is perhaps a significant cultural muscle that has never
       | been necessitated for English speakers. Since the earth has
       | largely been using English (in some capacity) for significantly
       | longer than my life span - as my favorite joke says in the punch
       | line "what do you call someone who only knows one language...
       | uni-lingual... jk: American"
       | 
       | PS: it seems like there could be an open registry maintained by
       | "Americans like me" who would rather pre-process the code for
       | tokens within the docs and src... seems like a "DefinitelyTyped
       | style" definitions registry would be very niche, but SUPER
       | useful.
        
         | musicale wrote:
         | > as my favorite joke says in the punch line "what do you call
         | someone who only knows one language... uni-lingual... jk:
         | American"
         | 
         | "Another thing to keep in mind, when you get to feeling bad
         | about being monolingual, is that the fair question is not 'how
         | many languages do you know?' It is, 'of the languages spoken by
         | five million people or more within a thousand miles or so of
         | where you live, what percentage do you know?'"
         | 
         | https://structuredprocrastination.com/light/biling.php
        
           | notpushkin wrote:
           | > of the languages spoken by five million people or more
           | within a thousand miles or so of where you live, what
           | percentage do you know?
           | 
           | IRL interactions are just one aspect of life. Pretty
           | important, sure, but it's not the _only_ important thing.
        
             | MobiusHorizons wrote:
             | Lots of the heavily multilingual people in the world also
             | have a lot of irl interactions that necessitate knowing
             | languages other than their mother tongue. Of course that's
             | not the only reason to learn languages, but it is both
             | common and effective. So in terms of expected number of
             | languages spoken I think it's a good baseline.
             | 
             | In the case of the US the languages that would meet that
             | criteria in most parts of the country would be English and
             | Spanish. But there are also hierarchies around languages,
             | ie people that speak the more dominant languages are less
             | likely to speak the less dominant languages, but the
             | speakers of the less dominant languages are expected to
             | speak the more dominant languages and suffer higher
             | consequences if they don't.
        
           | miki123211 wrote:
           | I prefer to view it as "what's the likelihood that, with your
           | current knowledge of languages, you're able to communicate
           | with any person you may presumably want to speak to in the
           | future."
           | 
           | This is why it's so much easier to only speak English than it
           | is to only speak another language.
        
             | Semaphor wrote:
             | > This is why it's so much easier to only speak English
             | than it is to only speak another language.
             | 
             | It's pretty easy to only speak German within the DACH
             | countries. Huge online communities as well that speak
             | German.
             | 
             | I'd wager it's similar for several other large languages,
             | e.g. Spanish or Chinese, OTOH they are even larger, OTOH
             | they probably don't have the same advanced dubbing industry
             | that we have.
        
               | pezezin wrote:
               | I am Spanish; we have a very strong dubbing industry and
               | pretty much all movies have been dubbed since forever. In
               | fact nowadays we usually get two dubs, one for Spain and
               | one for LATAM, with serious online fights about which one
               | is better xD
        
               | Semaphor wrote:
               | Oh interesting, I heard that it's almost never the case
               | that people are so attached to dubs as here, where people
               | often don't really care about the original voices and
               | instead about the dubbers, which might even get movie
               | billing.
               | 
               | > one for Spain and one for LATAM
               | 
               | What's the difference there for someone who is only
               | bilingual (English and German)? :D
        
               | dingnuts wrote:
               | There's a bit of variety in the vocabulary used between
               | LATAM and Spain, and honestly even between LATAM
               | countries there's variance.
               | 
               | An example that comes to mind, as a first year Spanish
               | student (I'm doing my best but fact check me because I'm
               | very much still learning!) with a Latin wife, is "el
               | carro," which means car, and is common in some Spanish
               | speaking countries but others might use "el coche" -- I
               | believe this dialectic difference even exists within
               | Latin American Spanish speaking countries!
               | 
               | There are differences in pronunciation too but that
               | obviously doesn't apply to subtitles
        
               | pezezin wrote:
               | Regarding "car", there is a third option: "auto", which
               | if I am not mistaken, is the preferred word in the
               | Southern Cone.
               | 
               | But yes, it is mostly a difference of vocabulary, accent
               | and pronunciation, and also how or if to translate the
               | names of characters and the movies themselves.
        
               | sach1 wrote:
               | As a Southern Conesman, can confirm.
        
           | fer wrote:
           | > of the languages spoken by five million people or more
           | within a thousand miles or so of where you live, what
           | percentage do you know
           | 
           | By that metric you shouldn't feel bad for not speaking
           | Russian in most of Russia, or for not knowing the most common
           | languages in your immediate surroundings in large swaths of
           | Africa (i.e. most Bantu languages would be excluded).
        
       | remexre wrote:
       | https://github.com/OpenXiangShan/XiangShan-doc/blob/main/doc...
       | 
       | The list of fused instructions is kinda weird; besides the ones
       | that correspond to SH{1,2,3,4}ADD anyway, I don't think I
       | expected any of the others.
       | 
       | I don't see a mention of Sifive-style short jump predication
       | there either, though I'm using Google Translate.
        
         | zozbot234 wrote:
         | Does RISC-V org itself list/document suggested insn fusion
         | sequences anywhere? I can't quite figure out whether they do
         | because the technical wiki they use is quite hard to navigate
         | and search, and their unofficial Github repos are not much
         | better.
        
           | snvzz wrote:
           | You might find this[0] reddit thread useful.
           | 
           | 0. https://old.reddit.com/r/RISCV/comments/1hnm5y1/where_did_
           | th...
        
             | zozbot234 wrote:
             | That's talking about the list of pseudo-instructions, which
             | are just special-cased assembly mnemonics for a _single_
             | RISC insn. I 'm wondering whether there's also a documented
             | list of suggested fusable sequences, comprising multiple
             | insns each.
        
           | Arnavion wrote:
           | The ISA spec itself suggests one fusion - that of mul and
           | mulh (lower and upper halves of n-bit * n-bit -> 2n-bit
           | product).
           | 
           | The only other source I know of was this 2016 paper that
           | suggested specific macro fusions.
           | https://arxiv.org/abs/1607.02318 This predates the B
           | extension so some of those fusions are dedicated instructions
           | now, but I suppose Xiangshan still implements them for the
           | sake of software that was not compiled with B enabled.
        
       | pantalaimon wrote:
       | I wonder what 'high performance' means in that context. So far,
       | RISC-V has been rather underwhelming in regards to performance
       | when compared to ARM or Loongarch (3A6000).
        
         | brucehoult wrote:
         | That's simply not true. RISC-V cores, SoCs, and boards perform
         | very comparably to even better than Arm devices with similar
         | uarch e.g. SiFive U74 vs Arm A55, SiFive P550 vs Arm A72, THead
         | C906 vs ARM1176.
         | 
         | While Arm CPUs have existed for 40 years, the initial RISC-V
         | spec was frozen and formally published only in mid 2019 and
         | most of the CPUs currently available to buy were designed
         | around that time.
         | 
         | This is quite normal. For example the Arm A76 core that
         | features in the latest Raspberry Pi 5 and RK3588 boards (Rock
         | 5, Orange Pi 5) was announced in May 2018, and took until
         | 2022/3 to be available in consumer SBCs. The A53, A55, and A72
         | had similar time spans from announcement until being available
         | in SBCs: Pi 3 / Odroid C2; Odroid C4; Pi 4.
         | 
         | Only in November 2024 was a RISC-V ISA spec suitable for high
         | performance phones, laptops, desktops, servers frozen and
         | published: RVA23. Cores meeting this spec and with expected
         | performance comparable to Arm A78 up to maybe X2 have been
         | announced, but it will be several years before they are
         | available in products.
         | 
         | RISC-V is simply very very new. It is doing very well in the
         | markets which it currently addresses.
        
         | itomato wrote:
         | I found these useful:
         | 
         | "The latest version of XiangShan achieves a normalized score of
         | 45 at 3GHz on SPECint 2006. With the performance comparable to
         | ARM Neoverse N2, it is the highest performing open-source
         | processor to our knowledge."
         | 
         | https://riscv-europe.org/summit/2024/media/proceedings/poste...
         | 
         | https://hc2024.hotchips.org/assets/program/conference/day2/2...
        
           | snvzz wrote:
           | Great, considering the project does not end at V3, and V3 is
           | already competitive.
           | 
           | They will continue to improve the performance.
        
         | camel-cdr wrote:
         | Check out my comment from a couple of month ago:
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41331786#41331968
         | 
         | TLDR in RTL simulation XiangShanV3 out-performs my current
         | desktop (Zen1) per cycle in the tested scalar benchmarks by 2x.
         | It's probably closer to 1.5x on regular code.
         | 
         | This roughly matches the reported SPECint2006 scores:
         | * XiangShanV2: 9.55/GHz         * XiangShanV3: 15/GHz         *
         | Zen2 [1]: 10.5/GHz at boost, 9/GHz at base frequency (closest
         | to Zen1 I could find)
         | 
         | For comparison:                   * Cortex-X1: 15.73/GHz
         | * Apple M1: 21.69/GHz         * SiFive-P670: >12/GHz         *
         | SiFive-P870: >18/GHz         * TT-Ascalon: 18-20/GHz         *
         | Akeana 5300: 25/GHz
         | 
         | Note that it's hard to find SPECint2006 scores for modern x86
         | or Arm cores because they all use PECint2017.
         | 
         | The final clock frequency obviously also has a big impact, but
         | XiangShanV3 target 3GHz which is quite decent.
        
       | tormeh wrote:
       | Cool to see another project using Chisel. Anyone in the industry
       | know what direction things are moving in? Seems like Verilog and
       | VHDL are ripe for disruption. I remember one of them as outright
       | unpleasant from university.
        
         | tinco wrote:
         | What has changed that they are now ripe for disruption? My BSc
         | thesis supervisor runs a company that tries to disrupt Verilog
         | and VHDL and they've been at it for well over a decade. I don't
         | think they're making much of a dent yet but I didn't keep up
         | with the space: https://github.com/clash-lang/clash-compiler.
         | There's also a RISCV implementation written in it.
         | 
         | All the tooling in this space is so expensive to build and
         | expensive to verify, with such a small market that it seems
         | almost impossible for something to ever challenge the incumbent
         | ecosystems in a reasonable span of time.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-01-03 23:01 UTC)