[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: RISC-V: quanta parte del processore ha licenza libera?



>>>>> "AR" == Alessandro Rubini <rubini@arcana.linux.it> writes:

AR> riscv-spec-20191213.pdf pagina 23 (ricordavo bene):

AR>    The conditional branches were designed to include arithmetic
AR> comparison operations between two registers (as also done in
AR> PA-RISC, Xtensa, and MIPS R6), rather than use condition codes
AR> (x86, ARM, SPARC, PowerPC), or to only compare one register
AR> against zero (Alpha, MIPS), or two registers only for equality
AR> (MIPS). This design was motivated by the observation that a
AR> combined compare-and-branch instruction fits into a regular
AR> pipeline, avoids additional condition code state or use of a
AR> temporary register, and reduces static code size and dynamic
AR> instruction fetch traffic. Another point is that comparisons
AR> against zero require non-trivial circuit delay (especially after
AR> the move to static logic in advanced processes) and so are almost
AR> as expensive as arithmetic magnitude compares. Another advantage
AR> of a fused compare-and-branch instruction is that branches are
AR> observed earlier in the front-end instruction stream, and so can
AR> be predicted earlier. There is perhaps an advantage to a design
AR> with condition codes in the case where multiple branches can be
AR> taken based on the same condition codes, but we believe this case
AR> to be relatively rare.

Lo so, non si fa, non si cita un grosso blocco di testo per un
commento di due righe...

Ma diamine, quanto mi mancava leggere cose del genere...

GRAZIE!

-- 
 /\           ___                                    Ubuntu: ancient
/___/\_|_|\_|__|___Gian Uberto Lauri_____               African word
  //--\| | \|  |   Integralista GNUslamico            meaning "I can
\/                 coltivatore diretto di software       not install
     già sistemista a tempo (altrui) perso...                Debian"

Warning: gnome-config-daemon considered more dangerous than GOTO


Reply to: