I like the idea behind RISC-V's open architecture but I had a question. Does it do or even try to do anything about the cloud of uncertainty surrounding Intel ME and the AMD equivalent in x86?
There are "instruction set architecture" and "microarchitecture" (=specific implementation of an ISA). ISA is the one more commonly referred to as just architecture, I think.
I don't think it necessarily addresses that concern, but Machine mode might be the right place to address the concerns which ME addresses on a RISC-V machine; which means that it's at least more likely that it'll be programmable on whatever machine you're looking at.
Just a thought though, it could really go any way. The nice thing though, is that you'll have more than two vendors, which means that the niche of PSP/ME paranoids may be large enough to address for a smaller designer, or through a limited run of licensed design (like SiFive's).
I'm one of the paranoids. This is one of the main things I'm hoping for. Is there any indication of what price point such chips might be offered at? I have no idea how much it costs to set up fabrication, etc., but it seems like ARM chips have done very well.
That depends on the manufacturer. There's no reason such a thing has to be there.
A lot of people are hoping that someone will put in the work to bring the architecture up to speeds competitive with i7 and mass-manufacture it, despite being legally cloneable.
I'm not much of a RISC-V guy, but using the arch doesn't require you to open up your design (the arch is basically BSD). So, someone who puts the effort into making a super fast risc-v core will still have an advantage over most everyone else as the effort required to create a fast core is a lot different from the effort required to just get something that works.
So, the devices can't just be "cloned" without the RTL/etc for the design, and even if someone got some masks or the RTL via an illicit source it would still be copyrighted enough to keep them from selling the clones..
Of course if "clone" means you spend hundreds of millions of dollars building your own competitive core, then yes that is still allowed..
There is a security working group. If you are concerned about this I highly recommend joining the foundation as an individual (or getting your employer to join), and asking to be put on that WG.
It’s a critically important question and it requires active grassroots involvement to make sure that we don’t end up with a mere clone of ME, or worse a “better ME.”
Intel ME is a co-processor that runs at the same time as the main processor, it is not related to the instruction set.
To answer your question: Intel ME is a problem that happens on an higher level than the document that defines instruction set.