RISC-V Ecosystem Gets More Standardization as Ubuntu Drops Non-Compliant CPUs

[AleksandarK]

Canonical, the company behind Ubuntu, has announced that its next-generation release will require RISC‑V processors to meet the newly ratified RVA23 profile. This specification, approved back in April, includes full support for Vector Instructions 1.0 and a Hypervisor extension. As Laurine Kirk, security researcher at Google, notes, by setting this higher baseline, Ubuntu 26.04 will no longer run on roughly 90% of existing RISC-V single-board computers, including the popular Raspberry Pi-style boards, unless their hardware is upgraded. Canonical's move puts it in step with Google and Microsoft, both of which have already targeted RVA23 for their RISC‑V builds. This change will drive manufacturers to ship more secure, future-proof silicon, helping to guard against exploits like GhostWrite, a memory-access vulnerability discovered last year in T-Head's XuanTie C910 CPUs.

We discussed RISC-V ecosystem fragmentation with Andrea Gallo, then the CTO and now the CEO of the RISC-V Foundation, regarding the fragmentation within the RISC-V ecosystem. "If you want to claim that you are RISC-V compatible, then there's an architecture compatibility test suite that verifies that you are complying with the ISA. We run the same tests on a golden reference model and compare the signatures of the tests to ensure alignment with the specification." He added that "We just ratified the RVA23 Profile. The newly ratified RVA23 Profile is a major release for the RISC-V software ecosystem and will help accelerate widespread implementation among toolchains and operating systems." For anyone who wants to ship a working RISC-V processor, be it data center or mobile, the RVA23 profile is the one that guarantees no fragmentation and compatibility.




Even Framework, maker modular laptops, has been criticized for shipping devices with older RISC-V implementations. Not everyone is convinced this approach will benefit the wider community. Hobbyists worry that excluding legacy boards will slow grassroots adoption, pushing developers to seek out distributions such as Debian that promise continued support through custom repositories. OpenBSD advocates point out that their operating system remains compatible with the full range of RISC‑V hardware, presenting an attractive alternative for those unable or unwilling to upgrade. However, as our interview with RISC-V Foundation CEO points out, the foundation "shipped more than 200 boards to individuals. If any key maintainer needs a board that they have not been able to get, they can contact us at help@riscv.org for evaluation and support."

For Linux OS makers like Canonical, requiring Ubuntu to meet an RVA23 baseline is a step in the right direction to help combat fragmentation and allow the RISC-V ecosystem to grow. Especially as the ISA specification and profiles are now standardized, software support is emerging rapidly for every type of workload, from mobile to HPC and AI.

View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source

 

[_roman_]

Thanks for the RISC-V topic. Next to arm another possible "amd64" replacement platform. X86 is dead since ages in software

 

[Onasi]

Thanks for the RISC-V topic. Next to arm another possible "amd64" replacement platform. X86 is dead since ages in software

I have been hearing the “x86 is dead” meme as long as I have been in this game, which is a while at this point. Unsurprisingly, it’s still alive and shows no actual signs of stopping.

 

[_roman_]

32 bit X86 is dead afaik. Except FEDORA - linux distrubtion waht I read recently. People complained about the removal of 32bit support.

It seems you could still crosscompile or have your own x86 gentoo linux also.

Most 32 bit x86 is dead afaik. Not sure about Windows 11 / Windows 10 32bit x86 support.

I'm since 2006 on amd64 linux kernel branch.

Turion MT-32

AMD Turion - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

64bit was fascinating in 2006.

 

[Onasi]

@_roman_
Oh, that’s what you meant. I thought you were referring to x86-64 overall. Most people don’t really differentiate since the evolution is direct. When people say x86 they usually refer to the current state of affairs, which is x86-64. After all, AMD64 is an extension of x86, not a separate instruction set.

 

[Daven]

New ISAs are always welcome. Diversity of hardware and companies makes for healthy economics. I hate that we have a new monopoly in GPUs but more players in the CPU space is better than it was before.

 

[ncrs]

New ISAs are always welcome. Diversity of hardware and companies makes for healthy economics. I hate that we have a new monopoly in GPUs but more players in the CPU space is better than it was before.

The problem is too much diversity that makes software support hard. Look at the myriad of ARM SBCs - each requiring its own special software support package. AMD64 has common boot capabilities with IBM PC-compatible BIOS (in the past) and now UEFI. You can take a random AMD64 system, be it a laptop or a multi-CPU server, and boot most operating systems on it using the same .iso.
This isn't the case in the ARM world apart from servers that support UEFI. For RISC-V there is some UEFI support, but again this isn't standardized among vendors. Look at Ubuntu's documentation for RISC-V - each and every platform requires separate OS images and differing installation methods.
IMO if ARM or RISC-V wants to dethrone AMD64 it needs to figure out a common stable base platform or it will face the same problems as ARM.

As for Ubuntu's decision I think it's a good one. Devices before RVA23 standard were not a good target for long-term support. Their performance was also not enough for widespread mainstream usage as a replacement for ARM/AMD64. In time maybe RISC-V will be competitive in that area.

 

[igormp]

Rip my nezha D1

 

[Daven]

The problem is too much diversity that makes software support hard. Look at the myriad of ARM SBCs - each requiring its own special software support package. AMD64 has common boot capabilities with IBM PC-compatible BIOS (in the past) and now UEFI. You can take a random AMD64 system, be it a laptop or a multi-CPU server, and boot most operating systems on it using the same .iso.
This isn't the case in the ARM world apart from servers that support UEFI. For RISC-V there is some UEFI support, but again this isn't standardized among vendors. Look at Ubuntu's documentation for RISC-V - each and every platform requires separate OS images and differing installation methods.
IMO if ARM or RISC-V wants to dethrone AMD64 it needs to figure out a common stable base platform or it will face the same problems as ARM.

As for Ubuntu's decision I think it's a good one. Devices before RVA23 standard were not a good target for long-term support. Their performance was also not enough for widespread mainstream usage as a replacement for ARM/AMD64. In time maybe RISC-V will be competitive in that area.

I’d rather have the problem of too much diversity than too little. Unfortunately there’s no such thing as just the right amount.

 

[AleksandarK]

I’d rather have the problem of too much diversity than too little. Unfortunately there’s no such thing as just the right amount.

As a developer I will not target your platform if it has 300 different flavors of ISA combinations. That is how x86 won, how Arm managed to break into server, and how RISC-V now wants to win. It is a step in the right direction. Have a unified ISA requirement, build around that. Good uArch architects (Jim Keller) can do their magic on any ISA, as long as its unified. If not, they will spend billions and end up with a product not capable of running Linux. So unify, control, and let the ecosystem thrive.

 

[Craptacular]

And people complained about Windows 11 dropping support for older CPUs......

 

[lexluthermiester]

X86 is dead since ages in software

That statement invalidated everything that came before it. And no, X86 is not dead. Just stop with that nonsense.

I have been hearing the “x86 is dead” meme as long as I have been in this game, which is a while at this point. Unsurprisingly, it’s still alive and shows no actual signs of stopping.

Exactly.

As for the article subject, this seems like foolishness on the part of Canonical. It's one thing to adopt a standard for good forward thinking security. It's completely another to force an ENTIRE platform to e-waste. This is microsoft levels of complete dumbassery and just as pathetic.

Not a good look for you, Canonical.

 

[Denver]

I wonder how much this will boost RISC V. Global Foundries' processes are dated, but it has the capital to invest in design and by having fabs it can mitigate costs through verticalization.

GlobalFoundries Acquiring MIPS - Phoronix

www.phoronix.com

"MIPS will continue to operate as a standalone business, serving its customers across a broad range of process technologies, foundry partners and ecosystem alliances. With GF’s backing, we’ll accelerate our Atlas roadmap, expand our ecosystem, and bring innovations to market with greater speed and scale.

We remain committed to open standards. RISC-V is more than an ISA, it’s a philosophy of openness, modularity, and ecosystem collaboration. Together with GF, we’re building platforms that empower customers to break free from legacy lock-ins and design differentiated solutions."