Mail Archives: pgcc/1999/05/20/15:39:36
On Wed, May 19, 1999 at 05:48:52PM -0400, Adam Schrotenboer wrote:
> Will the K7 be less "register starved" than the rest of the x86
> archictecture, or was this simply not possible while maintaining x86
> compatibility????
It is possible, the solution is named register renaming (a partial
solution, that is). Personally, I think the many cache miss buffers (20 or
32, I forgot) the K7 is assumed to have will make another difference.
> If it will have more registers, how much difference will this make
> performance or optimization-wise??
It will, but they won't be user-visible, and the chip is supposed to use them
automatically.
I don't know wether the K7 actually extends the register set (like the
P-III does), but I hope they do it in a sane way!
> Will this be a EGCS thing, or will it be more likely PGCC??
Both. EGCS will certainly add scheduling for the k7. Things like the
katmai instructions, however, will be a pgcc-only thing for some time. I
might decide to drop mmx support in favour of them ;)
> Anybody know when K7's will be available at a decent price (yes,
decent price???
--
-----==- |
----==-- _ |
---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann +--
--==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / pcg AT goof DOT com |e|
-=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ XX11-RIPE --+
The choice of a GNU generation |
|
- Raw text -