On 11/19/25 12:45 PM, Timur Tabi wrote:
> On Wed, 2025-11-19 at 15:34 -0500, Joel Fernandes wrote:
>> A struct could be another option? You have 2 entities here, the location of
>> the
>> memory (instruction memory or data memory) and the secure aspect.
>>
>> struct FalconMem {
>> type: FalconMemType, // enum which can be instruction or data
>> security: FalconMemSecurity, // enum can be secure or insecure.
>> }
>>
>> That documents everything. But it is just an option I am putting out to
>> consider
>> if it helps.
>
> Sure, but the security only applies to Imem, not Dmem. I didn't want to come
> up with a design that
> allowed for "Secure Dmem", like your FalconMem struct does. That's why I
> think it makes more sense
> to have just two Imem types.
>
Have we come full circle, back to the original patch, but with slightly
longer names (please)? (Spell out Secure and NonSecure, rather than
typing Sec and Ns.)
thanks,
--
John Hubbard
