From: dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar)
To: dewar@gnat.com, ja_walker@earthlink.net, lord@emf.net,
mszick@goquest.com
Cc: gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: An unusual Performance approach using Synthetic registers
Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2003 12:32:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030107120842.86DA1F28F7@nile.gnat.com> (raw)
> First, XCHG is what I think of as an Operating System instruction. It is
> quite valuable because the exchange can be limited to a single process on a
> single processor in a multiprocessor system, in conjunction with the locking
> process. It is one of the very reliable ways to implement semaphores.
Please look through the instruction set more carefully, this is NOT the way
you would implement any sychronization instructions on the x86.
Also, be very careful about timing of instructions when you start to look
at the complex instructions of the x86. No one should even think of generating
code for the x86 without reading the Intel guide for compiler writers.
Basically the rule on most variants of the x86 is that you should treat
it as a conventional load/store RISC machine when it comes to generating
code.
next reply other threads:[~2003-01-07 12:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 85+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-01-07 12:32 Robert Dewar [this message]
2003-01-07 19:03 ` tm_gccmail
2003-01-07 19:20 ` tm_gccmail
2003-01-08 7:52 ` Andy Walker
2003-01-08 19:29 ` Michael S. Zick
2003-01-08 20:10 ` Michael S. Zick
2003-01-08 20:44 ` tm_gccmail
2003-01-08 21:34 ` Michael S. Zick
2003-01-08 22:05 ` tm_gccmail
2003-01-08 6:08 ` Andy Walker
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-01-08 12:27 Robert Dewar
2003-01-08 12:13 Robert Dewar
2003-01-08 12:21 ` Lars Segerlund
2003-01-08 5:36 Robert Dewar
2003-01-07 21:01 Marcel Cox
2003-01-07 22:53 ` tm_gccmail
2003-01-08 1:05 ` tm_gccmail
2003-01-08 1:22 ` tm_gccmail
2003-01-08 11:45 ` Marcel Cox
2003-01-08 17:29 ` Marcel Cox
2003-01-07 17:19 Robert Dewar
2003-01-07 15:17 Robert Dewar
2003-01-07 17:02 ` Michael S. Zick
2003-01-08 6:56 ` Andy Walker
2003-01-08 12:14 ` Michael S. Zick
2003-01-07 12:08 Robert Dewar
2003-01-07 12:10 ` Momchil Velikov
2003-01-06 20:59 Robert Dewar
2003-01-07 5:29 ` Andy Walker
2003-01-07 21:49 ` Marcel Cox
2003-01-07 21:55 ` Branko Čibej
2003-01-07 21:55 ` Marcel Cox
2003-01-08 17:32 ` Tom Lord
2003-01-05 15:47 Robert Dewar
2003-01-05 22:14 ` Tom Lord
2003-01-05 14:08 Robert Dewar
2003-01-05 16:50 ` Michael S. Zick
2003-01-06 19:42 ` Tom Lord
2003-01-06 8:06 ` Andy Walker
2003-01-06 22:45 ` Michael S. Zick
2003-01-07 6:04 ` Andy Walker
2003-01-05 14:05 Robert Dewar
2003-01-06 19:42 ` Tom Lord
2003-01-06 6:49 ` Andy Walker
2003-01-05 13:13 Robert Dewar
2003-01-06 4:40 ` Andy Walker
2003-01-06 16:46 ` Michael S. Zick
2003-01-07 5:20 ` Andy Walker
2003-01-06 19:42 ` Tom Lord
2003-01-06 6:39 ` Andy Walker
2003-01-06 6:50 ` Daniel Berlin
2003-01-06 9:00 ` Andy Walker
2003-01-05 11:41 Robert Dewar
2003-01-05 16:30 ` Michael S. Zick
2003-01-06 4:53 ` Andy Walker
2003-01-06 19:50 ` Tom Lord
2003-01-06 6:29 ` Andy Walker
2003-01-06 21:53 ` Michael S. Zick
2003-01-07 6:02 ` Andy Walker
2003-01-07 17:41 ` Janis Johnson
2003-01-04 18:12 Robert Dewar
2003-01-04 14:50 Robert Dewar
2003-01-04 18:00 ` Denis Chertykov
2003-01-05 5:53 ` Andy Walker
2003-01-05 5:43 ` Andy Walker
2002-12-27 5:47 Chris Lattner
2002-12-29 0:35 ` Andy Walker
2002-12-29 5:58 ` Chris Lattner
2002-12-29 6:26 ` Alexandre Oliva
2002-12-29 12:04 ` Andy Walker
2002-12-29 13:58 ` Daniel Berlin
2002-12-29 22:41 ` Andy Walker
2002-12-29 15:50 ` Diego Novillo
2002-12-29 22:44 ` Andy Walker
2002-12-30 1:30 ` Zack Weinberg
2002-12-30 2:57 ` Andy Walker
2002-12-30 7:52 ` Michael S. Zick
2002-12-29 7:44 ` Daniel Egger
2002-12-29 12:10 ` Andy Walker
2002-12-30 20:58 ` James Mansion
2002-12-31 3:56 ` Michael S. Zick
2002-12-30 1:09 ` Michael S. Zick
2002-12-30 7:27 ` Daniel Egger
2002-12-30 10:25 ` Michael S. Zick
2002-12-30 20:50 ` Daniel Berlin
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=20030107120842.86DA1F28F7@nile.gnat.com \
--to=dewar@gnat.com \
--cc=gcc@gcc.gnu.org \
--cc=ja_walker@earthlink.net \
--cc=lord@emf.net \
--cc=mszick@goquest.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).