lowRISC / lowRISC/dvsim

Move the notion of variants to FlowCfg

Open
#165 1 comment 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

enhancement
Dominant language
Python
Stars
13
Forks
21
Avg merge
1d 11h
Merged PRs (30d)
8

Description

These are defined and handled in child classes (including SimCfg), but that's a bit odd, because a variant is something about a mode of the design rather than a mode of the testbench.

Move them to FlowCfg, which will probably make more sense (and, I suspect, will also simplify some code)

Contributor guide

Open the contributing guide

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

Research direction

Start by tracing where variants are defined and handled in FlowCfg's child classes, especially SimCfg, and compare how design modes are represented. Move the variant ownership to FlowCfg and verify that existing flows retain their behavior; run the repository's available checks after updating the affected classes.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Assessment

Tech stack
python
Domain
build-system, tooling
Issue type
Refactor
Difficulty
4/5
Estimated time
3-5 days
Activity status
Quiet
Clarity
Mostly clear
Newbie friendliness
48/100

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.