Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1999 19:16:07 -0800 (PST) From: Curt Sampson <cjs@cynic.net> To: Alfred Perlstein <bright@hotjobs.com> Cc: sparc@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: arch questions Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.4.02.9901041914480.12572-100000@epistolic.cynic.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9901041155450.37756-100000@bright.fx.genx.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 4 Jan 1999, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > a) the insturctions stay at 32bits wide, so we don't have much bloat to > worry about, and we don't incur much penalty for using larger ints. (if we > choose to use 64 bit ints) You'd probably want to stick with LP64, like the alpha, rather than go to ILP64. I don't really see any gain to ILP64. > b) using 64bit values/ABI is MUCH cheaper, in fact using old sparc32 > methods of accessing memory can seriously hurt performace as several > opcodes to access 64bit values in sparc32 code are depreciated and can > cause massive pipeline stalling and traps to the OS to emulate certain > VERY depreciated opcodes Surely the compiler can be told to avoid this stuff when generating 32-bit code? cjs -- Curt Sampson <cjs@cynic.net> 604 801 5335 De gustibus, aut bene aut nihil. The most widely ported operating system in the world: http://www.netbsd.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-sparc" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.NEB.4.02.9901041914480.12572-100000>