bug 1048, ls011: Add Fixed Store Shifted Post-Update section

[libreriscv.git] / why_a_libresoc.mdwn

diff --git a/why_a_libresoc.mdwn b/why_a_libresoc.mdwn
index 069f43176b5c5b800b9703e4f5ea744d35eb92c9..88e84944218ce98a70e1211611a31c32c7d0bf11 100644 (file)
--- a/why_a_libresoc.mdwn
+++ b/why_a_libresoc.mdwn
@@ -2,7 +2,11 @@
 
 ## TLDR
 
-We believe a computer should be safe to use, and this starts with a safe processor.
+We believe a computer should be safe to use, and this starts with a open processor.
+
+We also believe that an open processor doesn't mean a weak processor.
+
+Check out our [mission](../The_Mission).
 
 ## The Lengthier Explanation...
 
@@ -12,7 +16,7 @@ There are entire [dissertations](http://www.kroening.com/diss/diss-kroe.pdf) ded
 
 Given the fact that performant bug-free processors no longer exist [1][2], how can you trust your processor [3]? The next best thing is to have access to a processor’s design files. Not only have access to them, you must have the freedom to study, improve them, run the test suites and be able to improve those too.
 
-Not only that, you and everyone who has a stake in the success needs to be entirely free from NDAs and other restrictions which prevent and prohibit communication.  An example: although you yourself might not have the technical capability to review our SoC, you can always find a third party to pay wjo can.  However if the source code was under NDA, do you think that would be practical to consider?
+Not only that, you and everyone who has a stake in the success needs to be entirely free from NDAs and other restrictions which prevent and prohibit communication.  An example: although you yourself might not have the technical capability to review our SoC, you can always find a third party to pay those who can.  However if the source code was under NDA, do you think that would be practical to consider?
 
 *Collaboration, not competition*.