Pseudoinstruction examples don't work for RV64

[allenjbaum]

The examples shown for the LA and LI insructions only work for RV32.
For RV64, any address at an offset of > +/-2GB won't work with the example shown.
The LI case has the same issue, as does the absolute addressing example (though the LI example does mention it is for an RV32i)

[aswaterman]

Note that LI does work for arbitrary 64-bit constants in RV64; it expands into a potentially long and inefficient shift-and-add sequence.

It's certainly true that LA doesn't work for arbitrary 64-bit addresses (unless using PIC).

[allenjbaum]

My title was misleading. It is entirely correct that LI and LA can work with either architecture.
What doesn't work are the example in the text, which don't mention that the RV64 versions may (or may not) take more actual instructions than the text indicates. Use of these pseudo instructions may cause failure of architectural tests that trap, depending on their exact aliignment, because of this uncertainty.
I am only asking that the text clarify the conditions under which the will or won't work, and the conditions under which the example shown will and won't work.