Re: Inquiry about brl statement

From: David Mosberger-Tang <dmosberger_at_gmail.com>
Date: 2007-04-28 06:00:53
Tony,

I'm sure I missed that point about brl.  I probably just assumed it
would have the same behavior as regular branches.  Thanks for catching
that.

  --david

On 4/27/07, Luck, Tony <tony.luck@intel.com> wrote:
> > As I remember it, a taken branch acts as a stop whereas a non-taken
> > branch doesn't (so if no explicit stop bit is following a branch, then
> > it must be OK for the entire group to be executed in parallel).  I
> > suppose it's possible the definition changed or that my (admittedly
> > bad) memory is playing tricks on me. ;-)
>
> The SDM page for "brl" doesn't look to have any get-out-of stop-bits-free
> option.  It says:
>
>  "This instruction must be immediately followed by a stop; otherwise
>   its behaviour is undefined."
>
> -Tony
>


-- 
Mosberger Consulting LLC, http://www.mosberger-consulting.com/
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Received on Sat Apr 28 11:23:43 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2007-04-28 11:24:04 EST