Deutsch   English   Français   Italiano  
<f18348717678b836ec439041e317582d@www.novabbs.org>

View for Bookmarking (what is this?)
Look up another Usenet article

Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: except what, is Vax addressing sane today
Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2024 18:40:31 +0000
Organization: Rocksolid Light
Message-ID: <f18348717678b836ec439041e317582d@www.novabbs.org>
References: <fcc1d80b06e991bf9a27b64ff973b720@www.novabbs.org> <memo.20240922123047.19028M@jgd.cix.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="3036965"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="65wTazMNTleAJDh/pRqmKE7ADni/0wesT78+pyiDW8A";
User-Agent: Rocksolid Light
X-Rslight-Site: $2y$10$xEk4ba9o6tRFSg.JdlmrJ.sCik7wBbg5298l8jVeJCXLzvqwsmo/O
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
X-Rslight-Posting-User: ac58ceb75ea22753186dae54d967fed894c3dce8
Bytes: 2133
Lines: 25

On Sun, 22 Sep 2024 11:30:00 +0000, John Dallman wrote:

> In article <fcc1d80b06e991bf9a27b64ff973b720@www.novabbs.org>,
> mitchalsup@aol.com (MitchAlsup1) wrote:
>> On Sun, 22 Sep 2024 0:14:49 +0000, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:
>>> On 9/21/2024 4:29 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>> Aren't branches that are not taken supposed to be fast?
>>> Well, they are not taken, so they should be faster... ;^)
>> It is NOT the speed, it is the code bloat.
>
> Yup. Bigger code is always a potential problem, not so much because it
> takes up RAM nowadays, but because it takes up memory bandwidth and
> cache
> space. Using up cache space is always bad, because bigger caches are
> slower, and instructions seem naturally smaller than cache blocks.
>
> Wanting smaller code isn't an argument against RISC, but an argument
> against poorly optimised ISA design. Variable-length CISC makes it
> easier to get smaller average instruction sizes but has other drawbacks.

Variable length RISC makes it easier, too.

> For the stuff I work, on ARM64 code is consistently smaller than x86-64,
> although the factor varies by platform.
>
> John