public inbox for gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Omar <gcc.omar@gmail.com>
To: "Ian Lance Taylor" <iant@google.com>
Cc: gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Scoping effort needed to support new CPU
Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2008 22:34:00 -0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <178adb870804091433p2706a0a6sef6a445c5c4cf9c5@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m3skxvnjtd.fsf@google.com>

Ian,
 Thanks for for your comments. This is very valuable information.

>  Why not just use an ARM core?
 We have analyzed several cores and have rank them in several categories.
 In our analysis, the ARM scores high in code density, and in
toolchain quality (we call it the the gold standard).
 One of the issues with the ARM core is the gate count is relatively
high (almost 2x that of MSP430 and 4X that of the core we currently
use).

 Currently, we have a in-house-brewed compact CPU architecture that we
have sucessfuly used for a similar application, with the advantage of
very low power, low gate count (1/8 the size of the ARM) and high code
density. The limitation with this CPU is that the instruction set is
limited to the point that is not capable of supporting C. Or plan is
to extend this CPU's instruction set carefully so that the code
output from GCC is highly compact and dense, while keeping in check
the gate count and power dissipation. Execution time is not one of our
top concern for this project, since this CPU core is targetted to run
a highly specialized algorithm.

 Your recommendation of hiring an expert with experience doing GCC
ports is a good idea.  I will like to have an expert come over and
give us a kick-start on how to go about porting GCC, and also our
digital designers will be curious to get a better understanding on
which instructions are more beneficial in terms of code density.

Again, thanks for your valuable comments.

Regards,
-Omar

      reply	other threads:[~2008-04-09 21:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-04-08 22:09 Omar
2008-04-09 15:51 ` Ian Lance Taylor
2008-04-09 22:34   ` Omar [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=178adb870804091433p2706a0a6sef6a445c5c4cf9c5@mail.gmail.com \
    --to=gcc.omar@gmail.com \
    --cc=gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org \
    --cc=iant@google.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).