It maybe is, and if it is, it's also still the current industry standard. I work on embedded projects, and RISC-V is in a stage of "a minority of customers is considering it", with it being totally irrelevant currently for large swaths of markets. That's "up-and-coming challenger" at best, not "industry standard".
But it has few available chips right now, none of which are ultra-pow-power IoT app cores, and the big stacks like Zephyr & Matter & NuttX & FreeRTOS only support a sprinkling of chips anyways.
I don't disagree with you per se, but it's still such early formative years & progress is slow.
The core is just such a small part too. It's great to see risc-vites starting to spec our the rest of the platform too. But like the first decades of ARM, it feels like most chips especially lightweight ones have bespoke Device-Tree configuration, rather than real platform.
Comments
The industry standard is without a shred of a doubt ARM.
ARM is, without a shred of a doubt, the legacy architecture.
It maybe is, and if it is, it's also still the current industry standard. I work on embedded projects, and RISC-V is in a stage of "a minority of customers is considering it", with it being totally irrelevant currently for large swaths of markets. That's "up-and-coming challenger" at best, not "industry standard".
RISC-V is inevitable.
But it has few available chips right now, none of which are ultra-pow-power IoT app cores, and the big stacks like Zephyr & Matter & NuttX & FreeRTOS only support a sprinkling of chips anyways.
I don't disagree with you per se, but it's still such early formative years & progress is slow.
The core is just such a small part too. It's great to see risc-vites starting to spec our the rest of the platform too. But like the first decades of ARM, it feels like most chips especially lightweight ones have bespoke Device-Tree configuration, rather than real platform.